Jonathan’s practice includes the full spectrum of real property and commercial and residential landlord and tenant disputes.

He has significant experience in rights of light disputes and disturbances of other easements, acting for both developers and land owners, involving claims for injunctive relief and damages in lieu.  His cases frequently involve expert evidence on negotiating damages based on a share of development profit.  His recent work includes a claim for £1.9m arising out of the redevelopment of a prominent site in Shoreditch. 

Jonathan advises and litigates on joint venture disputes and other matters relating to land including contracts for sale, overage, options, injunctions, specific performance, possession and orders for sale.

He is acknowledged as a leading practitioner in the field of restrictive covenants.  Recent cases include:

• Lees v Southern Electric Power Distribution Plc LC-2023-000412.  Acting for objector in relation to land adjoining an electricity substation.  
• Blackhorse Investments (Borough) Limited v Southwark LBC LC-2021-000445.  Application to set aside a final order modifying a restrictive covenant to permit conversion of a former public house into residential flats.
• Martin v Lipton [2020] UKUT 8 (LC); [2020] PLSCS 7.  Successfully acted for an indemnity provider in a claim for modification of a restrictive covenant preventing development.  The claim was fiercely opposed by all of the insured’s neighbours. 

Jonathan’s extensive knowledge of the statutory protections in the residential landlord and tenant context make him the first choice counsel on matters affecting mixed-use developments.  He advises and litigates on lease interpretation, tenants’ rights of first refusal, leasehold enfranchisement, right to manage, variation of leases and service charges. His cases frequently involve large group litigation. Recent notable cases include:

• Saunders v Shenfield Limited [2023] UKUT 208 (LC) FTT Procedure; standard directions; disclosure; QLTAs.
• Riverside Crem 3 Ltd v Unsdorfer [2022] UKUT 98 (LC); [2022] 4 WLUK 11 Whether management order binding following assignment of landlord’s reversion.
• Eastern Pyramid Group Corporation SA v Spire House RTM Company Limited [2021] EWCA Civ 1658; [2022] 1 W.L.R. 503; [2021] 11 WLUK 73; [2022] L. & T.R. 8; Times, January 17, 2021 Right to Manage; withdrawal of claim notice; proper construction of s.86(2); consequences of failing to serve notice of withdrawal on qualifying tenants.
• Chaun-Hui v K Group Holdings Inc [2021] EWCA Civ 403; [2021] 1 W.L.R. 5981; [2021] 3 WLUK 329; [2022] 1 P. & C.R. 14; [2021] L. & T.R. 12 Whether payments under a management order are “service charges”; recovery of arrears owed to manager following termination of manager’s appointment.
• Eshraghi v 7/9 Avenue Road (London House) Ltd [2020] UKUT 208 (LC) Service charges; Reserve funds; Jurisdiction; legal costs.
• Consensus Business Group (Ground Rents) Ltd v Palgrave Gardens Freehold Co [2020] EWHC 920 (Ch); [2020] 4 WLUK 236; [2020] 2 P. & C.R. 13; [2020] L. & T.R. 12 Collective enfranchisement; Initial notices; Validity; Permission to amend; meaning of “self-contained building”. 
• Freehold Properties 250 Ltd v Field & Others [2020] EWHC 792 (Ch); [2020] Ch. 665; [2020] 3 W.L.R. 233; [2020] 4 WLUK 142; [2020] L. & T.R. 15 Meaning of “tenant of a leasehold house” in s.1(1) of 1967 Act; no right to enfranchise an eggshell lease; whether parcels clause void under s.23(1).  Permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal was granted but the appeal was withdrawn.
• Camden LBC v Morath [2019] UKUT 193 (LC); [2020] L. & T.R. 4; [2019] 6 WLUK 382 Variation of leases; Mixed use developments
• Wigmore Homes (UK) Ltd v Spembly Works Residents Association Ltd [2018] UKUT 252 (LC); [2019] H.L.R. 6; [2019] L. & T.R. 12 Conditions precedent; Interim payments; Reasonableness
• Fairman v (1) Cinnamon (Plantation Wharf) Limited (2) Plantation Wharf Management Limited (3) Cube Real Estate Developments Limited [2018] UKUT 421 (LC) Lease construction; power to vary apportionment; applicability and effect of section 27A(6) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
• CQN RTM Company Limited v Broad Quay North Block Freehold Limited [2018] UKUT 183 (LC); [2018] 7 WLUK 758; [2019] H.L.R. 9; [2018] L. & T.R. 26 Right to Manage; meaning of "structurally detached".
• The Optic Freeholders Limited & Others v Francia Properties Limited [2018] 9 WLUK 451 Tenants' Rights of First Refusal; Enforcement of Purchase Notice 16 years after relevant disposal; validity of purchase notice; delay; whether planning permission a "change in circumstances."
• Francia Properties Ltd v Aristou & Ors [2017] L. & T.R. 5 Whether roof development interferes with RTM company's management functions - permission granted for leapfrog appeal to CA.

Jonathan continues to act for the leaseholders in the ongoing Canary Riverside Litigation which ostensibly concerns a management order made under Part IV of the 1987 Act but has involved land registration; priority of interests and whether a management order is binding on successors in title: Riverside CREM 3 Limited  v Unsdorfer & Others [2022] UKUT 98 (LC).  In addition to the underpinning property law, the issues have included conflict of interest, breach of confidence and legal privilege (arising from an attempt to use documents obtained from a laptop stolen to order from the manager’s home) and excluding evidence on the basis of relevance.  A hearing in December 2023 considered whether a tribunal manager can be an “Accountable Person” under the Building Safety Act and the interaction between building safety functions under the BSA and management functions under a management order.  In related litigation, Jonathan is due to appear in the Upper Tribunal in March 2024 on an appeal concerning £1.5m unlawful insurance commissions.  The matter is listed for a further 10-day hearing in the FTT in May 2024 to decide whether the management order should be extended and on what terms. 

A significant part of Jonathan’s work is in a commercial context.  The vast majority of his cases include issues relating to contractual interpretation.  His practice includes business disputes between commercial parties and involves commercial fraud, enforcement of judgments and asset tracing.

Jonathan particularly enjoys working as part of a team in large, complex litigation where he leads on property-related issues. 

He accepts instructions in disputes (litigation and arbitration) in the Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, Jersey, Guernsey, the Dubai International Financial Centre and Bermuda.

Jonathan has extensive experience of cases involving fraudulent dispositions, sham transactions and allegations of dishonesty. He is a seasoned trial advocate and has been involved in a number of cases involving the bona fides of a declaration of trust including Tigris Industries Inc v Ghassemian [2016] EWCA Civ 269; Saranovic v Saranovic The Times, March 21, 2017; and Premium Jet AG v Sutton [2017] EWHC 186 (QB). 

He is highly sought after in such cases for his forensic eye for detail and his prowess in cross-examination at trial.   

Jonathan has acted as sole counsel on company matters including petitions under s.994 of the Companies Act 2006 and cases concerning directors’ duties.  He is particularly experienced on matters relating to the management and administration of companies owned and controlled by leaseholders.

His trusts work encompasses co-ownership disputes and applications for orders for sale/TOLATA claims in both the domestic and commercial context. He successfully argued for a resulting trust analysis in Chaudhary v Chaudhary [2013] EWCA Civ 758; [2013] 2 F.L.R. 1526; [2013] Fam. Law 1257, cited in all the leading texts.  He successfully appeared in the Upper Tribunal (Fancourt J) concerning the First-tier Tribunal’s jurisdiction to determine an application by joint trustees in bankruptcy to register a restriction against a property held in joint names (Wolloff and Dante (as Joint Trustees in Bankruptcy of Alexander James Dhillon) v Patel [2019] UKUT 333 (LC)). 

Jonathan has particular experience of cases involving fraudulent dispositions, sham transactions and allegations of dishonesty. He is a seasoned trial advocate and has been involved in a number of cases involving the bona fides of a declaration of trust including Tigris Industries Inc v Ghassemian [2016] EWCA Civ 269; Saranovic v Saranovic The Times, March 21, 2017; and Premium Jet AG v Sutton [2017] EWHC 186 (QB).

Jonathan acts in a range of professional negligence disputes, invariably involving solicitors, valuers, surveyors and other property professionals. His extensive knowledge of the underpinning substantive property law and/or valuation principles makes him a natural choice.

Recent work includes a claim against solicitors for failing to register a transaction in circumstances where the vendor subsequently re-sold the property to an innocent third party.      

Jonathan has significant experience in banking and financial services disputes. He has acted in many high value cases about the enforcement of securities in regulated and unregulated lending. He is often instructed to advise and act in securities and receivership cases where enforcement is challenging.

Recent works include Uthyavel v Raviraj [2021] EWHC 501 (Ch), a 5-day trial regarding a complex partnership dispute about a business and properties in East London. 

Jonathan frequently acts for large groups of leaseholders.  Recent examples include:

• The Canary Riverside Litigation (e.g. Riverside Crem 3 Ltd v Unsdorfer [2022] UKUT 98 (LC)).  Acting for over 100 leaseholders in bitterly contested litigation against the Yianis Group.
• Leaseholders of Phoenix Place v Better Intelligent Management.  Acting act for a group of investors who own flats in a development comprising studio accommodation in Liverpool.  There are parallel proceedings in the FTT and the Business and Property Courts. 
• Chaun-Hui v K Group Holdings Inc [2021] EWCA Civ 403; [2021] 1 W.L.R. 5981; [2021] 3 WLUK 329; [2022] 1 P. & C.R. 14; [2021] L. & T.R. 12 Acting for a large group of leaseholders in a mansion block on Park Lane, Mayfair.
• Fairman v (1) Cinnamon (Plantation Wharf) Limited (2) Plantation Wharf Management Limited Cube Real Estate Developments Limited [2018] UKUT 421 (LC) Acting for as large group of leaseholders in a dispute about the landlord’s power to vary the apportionment of service charges. 
• The Optic Freeholders Limited & Others v Francia Properties Limited [2018] 9 WLUK 451 Tenants' Rights of First Refusal; Enforcement of Purchase Notice 16 years after relevant disposal; validity of purchase notice; delay; whether planning permission a "change in circumstances."
• Francia Properties Ltd v Aristou & Ors [2017] L. & T.R. 5 Whether roof development interferes with RTM company's management functions - permission granted for leapfrog appeal to CA.

Jonathan has also acted in many cases for local authorities in borough-wide applications for dispensation with the consultation requirements in relation to electricity contracts, insurance and major works.  He has also acted for landlords in similar applications against large groups of leaseholders.  

Jonathan accepts instructions directly from members of the public under the Public Access scheme.  He frequently acts for developers, landlords, management companies and individual leaseholders.  In appropriate cases, he may also be able to accept direct access instructions from a large group of leaseholders.