Tanfield Chambers

Philip has a wide ranging commercial chancery practice which includes advocacy, drafting and advisory work in both non-contentious and contentious business and property related matters. He has wide experience in property law, wills, trusts and estates, including claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, together with associated areas of work. Within the property field his practice includes restrictive covenants, rights of way and other easements, adverse possession, claims involving rectification of the Land Register, co-ownership and trusts, mortgages, LPA Receivers, commercial tenancies including renewals, residential tenancies and leasehold enfranchisement, construction of covenants, dilapidations, forfeiture and relief. Commercial and business dispute areas include sale of goods, building disputes, partnership and insolvency work. He appears regularly in the Chancery and Queen's Bench Divisions of the High Court, the County Court, and before more specialised tribunals such as the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber). He accepts instructions through the Bar Council's Public Access Scheme in appropriate cases. Representative cases: Gold Harp Properties v MacLeod [2014] EWCA Civ 1084 – the Court of Appeal considered the power in the Land Registration Act 2002 Schedule 4 to change the priority of competing rights 'for the future' on rectification of the Land Register; Gold Harp Properties v MacLeod [2014] EWCA Civ 532- the Court of Appeal determined that the appellant could not be required to comply with the judgment below as a condition of pursuing an appeal; R (on the Application of Cyril Rapose) v Wandsworth LBC [2014] EWHC 469 – application for judicial review in respect of compulsory purchase order; Mead v Babington Estate Agents [2007] EWCA Civ 518 CA – misrepresentation claim in which Court of Appeal determined that trial judge on the evidence was entitled to find that the representations made by an estate agent based in the UK as to their relationship with a Spanish developer were sufficient to found a claim in fraudulent representation as the homebuyer had relied and acted upon that misrepresentation in purchasing their villa; Ilona Szekeres v Alan Smeath & Co [2005] EWHC 1733 – detailed assessment of solicitors bills despite defects contained within the claim form as the claim form as served had been sufficient to convey to the solicitor within the statutory period the message that the client wanted the bills to be assessed; Schulke Mayr UK Ltd v Alkapharm UK Ltd (1999) FSR 161 -remedy of passing off was not to be extended to a situation where the defendant's alleged false statements or 'puffing' of own product might have caused diversion from or confusion with the claimant's similar product.

Called 1991, Lincoln’s Inn.

Chancery Bar Association; Property Bar Association.

Leeds (1988, LLB).