Five Paper

Angela Hall

Angela is commended for her approachability and her composed and robust representation. She prides herself on providing practical and commercial advice on cases, which are often complex and emotionally charged. In Chambers, Angela has an active role in the following areas: Treasurer & Executive Committee Member: elected to the role in 2014 Pupil supervisor since 2011 Member of the Pupillage Selection Committee. Family Property Angela Hall advises and represents private clients on the division of property upon divorce, separation, family breakdown and death. This includes the following: Financial remedies on divorce, including the drafting or pre- and post-nuptial settlements Cohabitee disputes and other TLATA 1996 applications (Angela often acts for interveners in divorce proceedings) Applications under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 Schedule 1 of Children Act 1989 applications and high value child maintenance claims Contentious probate Mortgage possessions, including where there are concurrent divorce proceedings, bankruptcy or allegations of undue influence Paternity fraud (this is a niche specialist practice, Angela having been junior counsel on two of the most significant paternity fraud cases to reach the High Court/Court of Appeal in the last few years). Property & housing Angela is also highly regarded in the field of residential landlord and tenant and regularly advises local authorities and RPSHs on public policy and procedure. She is preferred counsel for a number of local authorities. Angela is instructed at all levels in the following areas: Anti-social behaviour Homelessness Landlord and tenant issues arising from the breakdown of marriage/relationships or death, including applications for the transfer of a tenancy in the family courts and succession disputes in the civil courts Children Act 1989/2004 obligations of the local authority Judicial review and public/equality defences, benefit entitlement and other regulatory work. Equality Act claims Housing Fraud Disrepair Court of Protection Unlawful Eviction Saleem v. Wandsworth LBC; Mohamood v. Kensington & Chelsea RLBC [2015] EWCA Civ 780: :, W v. C & M(1st instance decision embargoed):, X v Ealing Borough Council: Legal Action, Nov 2010:, R (on the Application of Daniels) v Barnet LBC: [2007] EWHC 1885 (Admin):

Ben Maltz

Ben is a property law specialist and heads up the Five Paper Landlord & Tenant Group. He undertakes work in all areas of property litigation with a particular interest in residential leasehold matters concerning service charges and leasehold enfranchisement, and real property disputes involving boundaries, adverse possession, restrictive covenants and easements. Ben is an accomplished advocate and has been ranked by the leading legal directories. Ben Maltz deals calmly and effectively with often complex property disputes. He values the importance of client care and always strives to adopt a pragmatic and common sense approach to his cases. Forward v Aldwyck Housing Group Ltd [2019] EWHC 24 QB; Partridge v Gupta [2017] EWHC 1110 (QB), Southern Land Securities Ltd v Poole [2017] UKUT 302 (LC), Brown & Reid v London and Quadrant Housing Trust [2017] LON/00AZ/OCE/2016/0330, Berndl & Others v Notting Hill Home Ownership [2017] LON/00AU/LSC/2016/0254, Christopher Moran Holdings Ltd v Laura Carrara-Cagni [2016] UKUT 0152 (LC), Red Kite Community Housing Ltd v Robertson [2014] UKUT 0134 (LC), Southern Land Securities Ltd v Hodge & Another [2013] UKUT 0480 (LC), Catalyst Community Housing Ltd v Katana [2010] E.G.L.R. 21 (CA),

Daniel Crehan

Daniel joined Five Paper in October 2017 after successfully completing his pupillage at chambers. Specialising in property and employment litigation, Daniel is an experienced advocate. Daniel has also gained valuable experience working in-house having been seconded to the legal departments of a local authority and a large housing association, which enables him to give clear, practical and robust advice. Landlord and Tenant Daniel specialises in landlord and tenant litigation and his practice encompasses the full range of disputes within the area. Daniel acts for both landlords and tenants in respect of both residential and commercial property, including social housing and leasehold disputes. Having been seconded to the in-house housing litigation teams of a London borough and one of the large housing associations, Daniel regularly acts for landlords with extensive property portfolios. Daniel’s in-house experience has provided him with an insight into the pressures that landlords face and enables him to represent his clients with a comprehensive knowledge of housing disputes, from initial breaches of tenancy to the enforcement of possession orders. As a barrister with a specialism in employment law, Daniel is well equipped to address Equality Act issues that arise within possession proceedings. Daniel’s recent work includes: Successfully resisting an appeal made by a tenant on the basis that a judge had made an error of law by making a possession order without exploring whether the tenant had a possible legal defence. Obtaining an unlawful profit order in the sum of £28,500, on behalf of a landlord in a case in which a tenant had obtained unlawful profits by both subletting a property and claiming housing benefit at the same time. Successfully applying to strike out a claim for significant rent arrears on behalf of a commercial tenant on the basis of the landlord’s repeated breaches of court orders. Representing a freeholder in a claim by a leaseholder for over £100,000 on the basis of an alleged breach of the repairing covenant. Advising on the enforceability of offers of new tenancies made by a housing provider inadvertently. Successfully arguing, on behalf of a tenant, that a local authority’s decision to seek possession was irrational as a result of a failure to follow its policies. Obtaining relief from sanctions on behalf of a landlord in a service charges dispute where the claim had been struck out because of its failure to pay the court fee, where several months elapsed between the strike out and the application and where the trial date had already passed. Daniel regularly acts for both employers and employees in a wide range of employment disputes. Before starting pupillage, Daniel built up his advocacy experience by representing claimants in employment tribunal hearings whilst volunteering for the Free Representation Unit. Daniel also gained a detailed understanding of disciplinary procedure and investigations by representing the families of excluded children at Independent Appeal Panels whilst volunteering for a pro bono organisation. Daniel’s practice encompasses a broad range of employment disputes including: Unfair Dismissal Wrongful Dismissal Constructive Dismissal Redundancy Unlawful Deduction of Wages Direct Discrimination Indirect Discrimination Harassment Victimisation Failure to make reasonable adjustments Bonus Claims

David Mold

David is a barrister at Five Paper specialising in Employment and Property law. He has acted in the High Court, frequently in tribunal and appeared for the successful Respondents in the Supreme Court in 2016. David also sits as a qualified Chair of the England Boxing disciplinary panel and is qualified to accept instructions on a direct access basis. Property Litigation David accepts instructions in a wide range of property matters both residential and commercial. These include easements, restrictive covenants, adverse possession, party wall matters, boundary disputes, nuisance and trespass, possession claims, forfeiture, enfranchisement, claims for new tenancies, service charges and construction of leases. He also deals with planning enforcement matters. Recent work: Advising on garden boundary dispute Claim for an order vesting the freehold, where the company was dissolved and the freehold was disclaimed as bona vacantia and escheated Advising on whether licences to park amounted to easements or bound successors in title Defending a prosecution for breach of a planning enforcement notice Acting on behalf of the claimant in a party wall dispute involving nuisance and trespass A claim concerning an easement to access property to the rear Inheritance & Trusts David handles all types of probate claims, the range of claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 and trusts disputes under TOLATA. Recent work: Application for a beneficiary to recover property from deceased’s home where PR’s not agreeing to access terms Advising on effect of mutual wills and subsequent wills made by deceased TOLATA claim for an order for sale where defendant alleged the claimant had agreed to waive interest in property TOLATA claim against sibling seeking determination of the parties’ respective interests in a property that had been inherited and where one party had been excluded Securing a sizeable sum for an adult child in a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 Social Housing David’s housing work covers homelessness appeals and judicial reviews, succession, assignment, sub-letting, disrepair and EPA prosecutions, licensing, anti-social behaviour, closure orders obtaining civil orders and committals. He has particular experience with mental health/capacity and Equality Act/human rights issues. Recent work: Ciftci v LB Haringey [2021] EWCA Civ 1772; Led by Stephen Evans successfully resisted an appeal brought by an appellant found to be intentionally homeless but who alleged ignorance of a relevant fact when acting in good faith. Acting for a local authority in committal proceedings for breaches of interim and final injunctions involving serious threats of violence Appeal to the tribunal against a decision to impose a financial penalty for breach of HMO licence Securing a possession order after trial on the basis that the defendant was not occupying the property as their only or principal home where Equality Act 2010 defences were raised Resisting an appeal under s.204 of the Housing Act 1996 against a decision that the property offered was suitable Employment David acts on behalf of both employers and employees and undertakes a full range of employment disputes. He has experience in unfair and wrongful dismissal, breach of contract, unlawful deduction of wages, TUPE, whistleblowing, wage and working time claims and has a particular focus on discrimination and cases involving aspects of immigration law. He deals with enforcement of restrictive covenants and is also instructed in partnership disputes. Recent work: Taiwo & Anor v Olaigbe & Ors [2016] UKSC 31 (22 June 2016); Led junior in the Supreme Court concerning whether discrimination on grounds of immigration status amounted to discrimination on grounds of nationality Hoppe v Revenue and Customs & Ors [2021] UKEAT 2020-00009; Acting for one of the respondents in the EAT concerning the issue of whether it was acting as the agent of HMRC (the Claimant’s employer) for the purposes of a whistleblowing detriment claim. Advising about the application of TUPE in relation to in-sourcing services Claim for discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal following a protracted suspension of an employee Resisting a claim for automatic unfair dismissal and whistleblowing relating to concerns raised about coronavirus

Donald Broatch

Donald Broatch has lectured on topics arising from his specialist areas of practice, including the European Convention on Human Rights, judicial review, and homelessness. He has recently given a lecture at Central Law Training on public law defences and conducted a seminar for local authority and social housing lawyers on the Public Sector Equality Duty in the Equality Act 2010. Public law; judicial review; social housing and related topics, including homelessness and allocations; employment; human rights Represented the Authority: significant case concerning housing and its financing for Zambrano carers. Appeal to Court of Appeal pending. Huzrat v Hounslow LBC [2014] HLR 70, Pryce v Southwark LBC [2013] 1WLR 996, Dharmaraj v Hounslow LBC [2011] HLR 18 (Court of Appeal), De-Winter Heald v Brent LBC [2010] 1 WLR 990, Novitskaya v Brent LBC & Sec of State [2010] HLR 21, Wilson v Ashford BC [2011] Env LR D1 (Admin Court), Ugiagbe v Southwark LBC [2009] HLR 35 (Court of Appeal), Law Society v Salsbury [2009] 1 WLR 1286, Moroney v Anglo European College of Chiropractic [2009] ELR111, CA [2009] EWCA Civ 1560, Hallam Peel & Co v Southwark LBC [2009] 2 Costs LR 269, R (Faarah) v LB Southwark [2009] HLR 12 (Court of Appeal), R (Yazar) v LB Southwark [2008] EWHC 515 (Admin), [2008] All ER (D) 273, Osei v Southwark [2008] HLR 15 (Court of Appeal), Slater v Lewisham [2006] HLR 37 (Court of Appeal), Evans v Secretary of State [2005] All ER (EC) 763 European Court of Justice, Paragon Finance v Pender [2005] 1 WLR 3412 (Court of Appeal)Southwark LBC v Mills [2001] AC 1, House of Lords, Luck v Tower Hamlets LBC [2003] EWCA Civ 52 (Court of Appeal), Paragon Finance v Nash [2002] 1 WLR 685, Court of Appeal, DPP v Ara [2002] 1 WLR 815, Divisional Court

Elizabeth England

Elizabeth is a member of the Property Team at Five Paper and a specialist in social housing and landlord & tenant law. Before joining the Bar in 2014, she qualified as a solicitor in 2008 and as a solicitor-advocate in 2012. In 2018 Elizabeth was listed in the ‘Hot 100’ feature by News on the Block as an influential landlord & tenant professional and has retained that position since. Elizabeth has a wealth of experience in property law and in 2005 was part of a government pilot scheme providing housing law advice via webcam to members of the public. Elizabeth is on the Consulting Editorial Board and a Contributing Author for Lexis Nexis in the area of social housing and residential landlord and tenant law. Elizabeth provides maintained educational resources on homelessness, possession and residential landlord and tenant matters. She is also a regular contributor to the Lexis Q&A facility and committee member for the Social Housing Law Association. Elizabeth's Social Housing practice covers all areas of housing law, including anti-social behaviour, possession proceedings, right to buy, unlawful eviction and harassment, allocation of social housing, disrepair, housing management, and injunctions. She regularly deals with Equality Act and Human Rights arguments and has advised and represented clients in a range of issues such as security of tenure, death and succession; interpretation of lease and tenancy clauses; housing conditions; compliance with policies; and the proportionality of eviction. Elizabeth regularly acts for local authorities in homelessness appeals and judicial review proceedings concerning housing duties. In addition to Social Housing, Elizabeth also receives instructions within the fields of Landlord & Tenant and Real Property, including advising on and represents landlords and tenants alike in the renewal of tenancies, rent review, service charge disputes, disrepair and leasehold enfranchisement for residential leasehold property; litigation involving easements, rights of way, the beneficial ownership of property, trusts of land, proprietary estoppel, adverse possession and boundary disputes.

Gillian Christopher-chambers

Gillian is an experienced advocate who provides expert advice and representation in the Property and Housing sectors Before coming to the Bar, Gillian worked for the Prime Minister at 10 Downing Street and has also extensive experience in EU Public Affairs. As a result she has garnered formidable negotiation and consultative skills and thrives under pressure. Gillian sat both as an Adult and Family Magistrate (Chair) on the Hertfordshire Bench from 2007 – 2017 and maintains a keen interest in civil/criminal jurisdictional crossover issues. Her experience as a Magistrate means she has a keen grasp of judicial process and the realities of the court arena. She is particularly renowned for her delicate care and skill for those clients who have more complex needs both as a representative and when dealing with litigants in person. Gillian regularly presents seminars on social housing topics including ASB reform, Committal processes, Public Space Protection Orders, Closure Orders and Environmental Protection Orders. Gillian Christopher Chambers practices in the field of Property, with particular expertise in: Anti Social Behaviour Hoarding and health hazards - dealing with vulnerable tenants. Mental Health - including Equality Act and Proportionality. Mandatory possession - Closure Orders and anti social behaviour Housing Dealing with public law issues in non-secure tenancies Subletting and Housing Benefit Fraud Evidential burden in succession cases Rent Act issues and trespass. Care Act crossover issues. Possession proiceedings Commercial Property Dilapidations and other termination issues. The construction and service of s25 notices in relation to repeated objections from tenants. Subletting and tenancies at will. Magistrates Courts Closure Orders Environmental Health Issues Council Tax issues

Gita Chakravarty

Gita specialises in the fields of commercial and chancery law, in particular contractual disputes and insolvency issues, and has been a member of Five Paper since October 2012. In 2016, Gita was seconded in-house at the specialist commercial and insolvency firm Francis Wilks and Jones. Gita has significant experience of working with lenders, from banks to individual lenders, on diverse issues including high-value mortgage possession claims, land registration and priorities. She is also well placed to advise on issues that cross between insolvency and property disputes. Banking Gita has knowledge and experience of all stages of bringing and defending guarantees claims. She has in-depth knowledge of various commercial claims arising out of factoring and invoice discounting agreements. Consumer credit Gita has experience of advising on and drafting pleadings in complex consumer credit matters for both creditors and debtors. Professional negligence Gita successfully defends and pursues claims of solicitors’ negligence and also has experience of claims against valuers arising out of mortgage lending Alternative dispute resolution Gita advises on ADR whenever appropriate and has practical experience of settling both high and low value claims and attending mediations.

Ian Wright

Ian is a specialist regulatory, employment and business immigration practitioner. He is recognised in the Legal 500 as a regulatory, health and safety expert. He is the Joint Head of the Business Immigration and Regulatory Team with Satinder Gill. He is described in the Legal 500 as a "compelling and persuasive advocate who remains calm under pressure.‘ He has a reputation for working extremely hard to achieve commercial outcomes for his clients through legal proceedings or settlement. His health and safety work is for both regulators and duty holders and he has a niche specialism on appeals under section 24 HSWA. Ian’s other regulatory work is in financial services, Care Quality Commission and professional disciplinary proceedings.In Business Immigration he has advised employers and businesses on entry routes under and outside the PBS. He has recorded a recent webinar on the ‘Right to Work and penalties for Illegal working’ for LexisNexis. He has advised individual and business clients on the right to work in the UK pre and post Brexit. His employment work has a particular focus on unfair dismissal and discrimination claims for both claimants and respondents. Ian’s regulatory health and safety work has lead to him being instructed in both the Supreme Court (2017) and the Court of Appeal (2015) in cases which established the test for an employment tribunal hearing a section 24 HSWA appeal. He has been on Part A of the Combined Regulatory List of Approved Counsel for more than 10 years. In March 2019 he represented a national stakeholder at an Inquest following a fall from the Pontycysllte Aqueduct (a World Heritage Site). The Jury concluded the fatality was a ‘misadventure.’ In May 2019 he was instructed in a notice appeal against a prohibition notice served under the CDM Regulations because of an unsafe excavation. The tribunal’s judgment considered for the first time the meaning of ‘control’ of construction works by a Principal Contractor. In 2018 he represented an Authorised Individual before the Financial Markets Tribunal in Dubai hearing a regulatory challenge in a financial services matter. Ian also successfully challenged the refusal of a subject access request by a Data Controller in Dubai to the Commissioner of Data Protection (June 2018). In 2017 he represented a Head Teacher at a multi day hearing before the NCTL. His recent Business Immigration work includes advice to employers and businesses under Tiers 1, 2 & 5, the Business Visitor Route outside the PBS and civil penalties for illegal work. Ian has also helped businesses prepare for Brexit by advising on Appendix EU to the Immigration Rules and the ‘Settled Status Scheme’ for current workers, family members and prospective new arrivals into the UK. His employment work is for both claimants and respondents to tribunal proceedings. Over many years he has built up experience and expertise particularly in unfair dismissal, discrimination and TUPE proceedings. In 2017 he appeared in the Court of Appeal over the provision of an interpreter to a party who had good written but poor spoken English. He regularly advises on employment contracts and internal disputes between employer and employee. HM Inspector of Health & Safety v Chevron North Sea Ltd [2018] UKSC 7, XY v Dubai Financial Services Authority [FMT 17004], XY v Dubai Financial Services Authority [Decision No. 3 of 2018], NCTL v Bacon (0014547/Bacon) (May 2017), Hague v Rotary Yorkshire Ltd [2015] EWHC 696

Jake Davies

Jake has been recognised as a leading junior in employment law by the Legal 500 for a number of years. His client base includes various public bodies and large corporate employers as well as directors and senior employees. Jake specialises in employment, contract, discrimination and whistleblowing claims and has successfully represented local authorities in various reported appeal cases. He is regularly instructed by public bodies and large corporate employers to give expert advice and appear in cases relating to contracts, internal procedures, reorganisations, job evaluations, pay, employment status, discrimination, Covid-19, tax, pensions, shares and other significant issues which potentially affect the whole work force. He has represented schools and local authorities at NCTL appeals. Jake leads the Employment group and is chair of the public access committee. He is also a member of the Banking and Finance and the Civil Fraud groups. His commercial practice includes restrictive covenants, breach of fiduciary duty and professional negligence. Jake has considerable experience of various mediation schemes. He accepts instructions on a direct access basis and is chair of chambers DPA committee. Reported cases include: Ukegheson v London Borough of Haringey [2017] EWCA Civ 1140 and [2015] ICR 1285 (EAT) (race, religious and sex discrimination), Steel v London Borough of Haringey [2015] All ER (EAT) (unlawful deductions) co.uk › Cases › 2014 › December, Horlorku v Liverpool City Council UKEAT/0020/15/DA) (race discrimination), Mba v Merton [2014] ICR 357 (CA) (religious discrimination)McIntosh v Governing Body of St Marks [2014] All ER (EAT)

Jennifer Moate

Jenny is a barrister specialising in social housing, landlord and tenant, trusts of land, financial remedies and private children law, with a particular expertise in mental health, discrimination and domestic abuse. She is Practice Group leader of the Family, Inheritance & Trusts team. Highly regarded in the field of Social Housing, having worked in the sector since 2005, Jenny is committed to excellent client care and gives realistic, practical advice at an early stage to ensure the best possible outcome. She offers an efficient, digital-based service. Jenny’s clear-sighted and tenacious approach is welcomed by all her clients, ranging from private individuals to local authorities. She is a skilled negotiator who frequently assists clients to reach successful settlement. Her incisive legal analysis, rigorous preparation and robust advocacy lead to repeatedly excellent results at court. Jenny recently appeared as sole counsel in the Court of Appeal in Molloy v BPHA [2021] EWCA Civ 1035 where she successfully defended an appeal against the use of CCTV and committal for racist abuse. Social Housing Jenny is a former member of the housing team at Hodge Jones & Allen Solicitors, where she was identified as a leading individual in the field of social housing. She is regularly instructed by local authorities, housing associations and tenants across all aspects of housing law. Her practice areas include: Possession – succession, tenancy fraud and anti-social behaviour Public law – homelessness appeals, allocation and Equality Act/PSED/proportionality defences Injunctions and committal – ASB, access and breach of tenancy Court of Protection and mental health Disrepair and environmental health Recent cases Molly v BPHA [2021] EWCA Civ 1035 – Jenny successfully appeared, as sole counsel, in defending an appeal against the use of CCTV and committal for racist abuse. Luton v Smith (2020) – Jenny resisted an unlawful discrimination/ PSED defence and secured a final injunction in circumstances where the medical report with details of the alleged medical conditions had been served late (following L&Q HT v Patrick [2019] EWHC 1263 (QB)). Peabody v Denti (2021) – Jenny secured final injunctive relief to exclude a tenant who had set a fire in their housing block, arguing that even if there was a diminished risk of repeated behaviour, other residents were at risk of harm due to trauma. Grant v L&Q and Usuanlele (2020) – Jenny struck out the EPA prosecution on the basis that the notice fell foul of the requirements in s82(6). Landlord & Tenant Jenny has a broad experience of property matters, having specialised in this area for over 15 years, acting for both landlords and tenants. Her practice areas include: Landlord and tenant disputes including possession and breach of lease Dilapidations, disrepair and environmental health Business tenancies – renewal, termination and breach of lease First-tier tribunal (Property Chamber) disputes and Upper Tribunal appeals Family Jenny is experienced in all aspects of family law, specialising in private client matters. She has a particular expertise in domestic violence and mental health. Her practice areas include: Financial remedies upon divorce, from first appointment to final hearing Interim applications including maintenance pending suit and freezing orders under s37 Matrimonial Causes Act Private Children Act matters including child arrangement applications, relocation, specific issue, parental alienation, domestic violence and Schedule 1 Family Law Act claims including non-molestation and occupation orders TOLATA applications Recent work: P v P (2020) – Jenny secured a worldwide freezing order under s37 Matrimonial Causes Act to prevent the husband from disposing of assets before the conclusion of proceedings. Re E (2021) – Jenny resisted an application for a prohibited steps order and secured a child arrangements order in exactly the terms sought by the mother at final hearing, successfully arguing that at age 12, the child’s wishes and feelings should be a leading factor. B v U and another (2020) – Jenny won on the preliminary issue at final hearing, striking out the claim by successfully arguing that the written agreements between the parties were unenforceable. Mediation Jennifer is a qualified family mediator. She conducts mediations on a wide range of family matters including divorce, financial settlement, children arrangements and extended family disputes. She is particularly adept at helping clients find creative solutions.

Joe McBrien

Joe joined Five Paper in October 2020 after the successful completion of his pupillage and he is building a busy commercial chancery practice. Joe is an experienced advocate with both trial and appellate experience. Joe is a co-contributor to the 2022 edition of Atkin’s Sale and Supply of Goods and Services. In November 2020, he was appointed to the Attorney General’s Civil Junior Junior Panel of Counsel. Prior to starting pupillage, Joe worked as a Solicitors’ Agent where he gained substantial advocacy experience. Joe was also a manager in a firm of solicitors who provide advocacy services. In this role Joe worked closely with clients to provide practical, cost effective solutions to litigation. In 2018, he received a travel scholarship from the Middle Temple which allowed him to intern with a boutique commercial litigation law firm in the USA. Commercial Joe has a broad commercial litigation practice. In addition to his paper practice, Joe frequently represents lenders, companies and consumers at hearings, including at trial. Further, through his recent editing of Atkin’s Court Forms, Joe is well versed in issues arising out of contracts for the sale and supply of goods and services. Recent work includes: Attending a four day trial regarding claims in breach of contract and unjust enrichment. Settling a defence in a high value wrongful interference with goods claim. Acting as part of a counsel team, led by Rachel Sleeman, in a large document review exercise concerning a potential breach of trust and breach of directors’ duties with an estimated value of £3 million. Applying for an interim injunction for the delivery up of goods in the Circuit Commercial Court. Settling a defence and counterclaim in building dispute which also involved consideration of the law on VAT relief. Insolvency Joe frequently acts and advises in relation to both corporate and personal insolvency proceedings. Joe is familiar with bankruptcy proceedings and voluntary arrangements. Recent work includes: Advising on the presentation of a winding up petitions to enforce a Russian arbitral award. Representing a high-profile debtor in resisting a bankruptcy order. Assisting in advising a liquidator as to the merits of pursuing section 127 claims against the insolvent company’s landlord. Assisting in advising on whether Malaysian bankruptcy proceedings can prevent the presenting of a bankruptcy petition in the England and Wales. Assisting in drafting a witness statement to resist an application to set aside a statutory demand which was based on a debt from overdrawn director’s current accounts. Assisting in advising a director against a liquidator’s claim of there being transactions at an undervalue and preference. Assisting Simon Mills, as a pupil, in Lynch v Cadwallader and Anor [2021] EWHC 328 (Ch) where a Bankrupt challenged the Trustee’s decision to admit a debt founded on a unlimited guarantee into the bankruptcy Property Joe has experience of wide variety of property litigation, from real property to landlord and tenant matters. Joe frequently represents landlords in possession proceeding and in obtaining injunctive relief. Joe has particular experience in representing mortgagees, having acted in numerous such claims. Recent work includes: Settling pleadings in which a mortgagor lacks capacity and, through the litigation friend, asserts undue influence. Advising on substantial dilapidation claims. Representing a freeholder in the FTT for a leasehold enfranchisement hearing listed for two days Settling particulars of claim for a service charge dispute following major works. Settling a reply to a defence of non est factum when enforcing a charge against a guarantor.

Jonathan Rich

Jonathan (“Joe”) Rich has specialised in consumer and property law for twenty two years. For nearly ten years of that time, he has been recognised by the main directories as a leader in his field. The 2011 edition of Chambers and Partners praises his “high volume of contract work” and “excellent reputation for advising car, boat and plane dealerships” and makes it clear that he is “known for taking a very fair but very effective approach to his work”. He is identified by Legal Experts’ as a “Leader at the Bar” in four specialist areas – Consumer and Regulatory Law, Costs, Commercial and Property Law. Whilst the majority of Joe’s work is commercially-orientated, he undertakes a substantial amount of regulatory work, where criminal allegations are made. Joe acts for both suppliers and consumers, landlords and tenants. He offers a meticulous, unpretentious, approach towards avoiding, and resolving actual and potential litigation, as well as general consulting advice. Jonathan is perhaps best known for Court of Appeal appearances in Clegg v Andersson and Jones v Gallagher, the leading cases on satisfactory quality and loss of the right to reject goods and services. He appeared for the successful mortgagor in Zurich Securities v Potomek Construction, the leading case on sales at an undervalue by mortgagees. In nearly 20 years at the Bar, he has also represented more than 200 farmers, and others, whose livelihoods depend on dealing with animals. Kelly v Bakir, ChD, LTL 27/4/2009, Independent 8/11/08

Josephine Henderson

Josephine has been a housing specialist for more than 25 years. She has considerable experience in the field of homelessness and allocations with a particular interest in human rights, children, administrative and EC law. Josephine has experience dealing with complex discrimination cases and long leaseholder cases, anti-social behaviour, possession cases and housing conditions, including prosecutions. Josephine mainly represents social landlords and has appeared in a number of reported homelessness cases in the recent years. Social housing, homelessness and allocations, local government taxation, welfare benefits, judicial review, anti-social behaviour, landlord, tenant, service charges, management orders and property tribunal. XY v HARINGEY LONDON BOROUGH COUNCIL (2019) [2019] EWHC 2276 (Admin) reported on Lawtel: [2019] 8 WLUK 278 Acted for the local authority in a judicial review challenge to Homelessness Reduction Act assessments, Huda v London Borough of Redbridge [2016] EWCA Civ 709 Court of Appeal successfully responding to appeal on issue of intentional homelessness and discharge of duty to the homeless, Ersus v London Borough of Redbridge [2016] EWHC 1025 High Court costs decision following settlement of appeal on suitability of accommodation offered to homeless family, R (on the application of Sarbpreet Daudhar) v Oxford City Council [2015] EWHC 1871 (Admin) Homelessness and children, R (on the application of Paul Nicolson) (Claimant) v Tottenham Magistrates (Defendant) & Haringey London Borough Council (Interested Party) [2015] EWHC 1252 (Admin) Council tax costs, R (on the application of Leticia Mckenzie) v Waltham Forest London Borough Council [2009] EWHC 1097 (Admin) Homelessness and pregnant women, R(o/a Mangion) v London Borough of Lewisham [2008] EWCA Civ 1642 Social housing homelessness, administrative law, duty to give reasons, Mansfield District Council v Langridge [2008] EWCA Civ 264 Court of Appeal Landlord and tenant, security of tenure, distinction between licences and tenancies, Barrett v Southwark LBC [2008] EWHC 1568 Social housing, homelessness Lawtel AC0117804, R(o/a James Casey & ors) v Crawley BC & ODPM (interested party) [2006] EWHC 301 (Admin) judicial review, Gypsies and Travellers, eviction, inquiries, planning, human rights, Martin v UK (2003) ECHR Application No. 63608/00 Declared admissable on 27 March 2003. Privacy, covert surveillance by local authority in nuisance proceedings. Acted for applicant, Smith v Paul [2003] 1 All ER 509 Court of Appeal.Forfeiture, mortgages - pro-bono.R (o/a Reiner) v LSC, Claim No. 1600/02 Legal Action Nov 2002 Human rights, discrimination, access to legal aid for large family. Acted for applicant – claim resulted in change of legislation, R (o/a Ibrahim) v Redbridge LBC [2002] EWHC 2756.Social housing, allocations. Acted for local authority, Norwich CC v Stringer (2001) 33 HLR 15, CA, Local government, housing benefit, restitution, R v Southwark LBC, ex p. Campisi (1998) 31 HLR 560.Social housing, homelessness, R v Southwark LBC, ex p. Hughes (1998) 30 HLR 1082.Social housing, homelessness, Baxter v Camden LBC (No.1) (1997) 30 HLR 501.Subject/areas of law Social housing, landlord and tenant, noise nuisance, R v Southwark LBC, ex p. Bediako (1997) 30 HLR 22.Subject/areas of law Social housing, homelessness, asylum seeker.

Julie Leivesley

Since 2000 Julie has specialised in Family Law and Human Rights. She has extensive experience of all aspects of Matrimonial Finance and Private Children Law. Julie is regularly instructed to deal with the financial repercussions of divorce, often advising on inherited property, business valuation and pension aspects. In 2005 she spent several months conducting a regulatory review of pensions for a major pension provider. She is also instructed in a wide range of private children cases including: cases involving r9(5) guardians, applications for: residence; contact; specific issue; prohibited steps; parental responsibility; leave to remove from the jurisdiction and DNA testing. Julie also brings an extra dimension to the Family Team with her extensive experience of all aspects of immigration but with an emphasis on commercial immigration, including business visas, work permits and entry clearance applications. Her advocacy in this field is supplemented by pleadings and advisory work, including applications to the ECHR." Bekteshi [2004] EWHC 803 (Admin), RS (Hezbe Islami – Expert Evidence) Afghanistan [2004] UKIAT 00278, Namazzi [2003] UKIAT06707, Andrews [2002] UKIAT07598 Yusuf [2002] UKIAT05165

Laura Williamson

Laura is a property law specialist. She has extensive trial experience and is regularly instructed at every stage from initial advice and drafting through to final hearing. She also has experience of appeal hearings in both the County Court and the High Court, and has been led in the Court of Appeal. Previous clients have praised Laura’s diligence and strategy, and have described her as “absolutely brilliant” and “outstanding as an advocate”. In March 2018, Laura was appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel of Junior Counsel to the Crown following an extremely competitive application process. Laura enjoys a broad property law practice encompassing real property, leasehold, landlord and tenant, and social housing work. Laura’s clients include private individuals, companies, local authorities and other large organisations. She has previously been instructed to provide advice, draft pleadings and conduct hearings in relation to the following: Service charge disputes, including challenges to reasonableness and section 20 consultation requirements Forfeiture proceedings Leasehold extension under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 Disposing of a freehold reversion under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 Obtaining vacant possession of a social housing block occupied by elderly and vulnerable tenants to make way for a major redevelopment scheme Business tenancies under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Ownership and maintenance of boundary walls Equitable interests, including injunctions to restrain the disposal of property held on trust The interpretation of commercial leases Applications for orders for sale Possession proceedings against squatters Homelessness appeals Laura has also acted for and advised numerous clients in relation to the following: The variation of tenancy agreements Anti-social behaviour injunctions and committal proceedings Possession proceedings on grounds of rent arrears and other breaches of tenancy agreement Possession proceedings based on failed succession claims, non-occupation and subletting Possession proceedings against tenants with mental health problems and/or capacity issues Applications to stay warrants for eviction Applications to re-enter

Mary Glass

Mary specialises in public law, primarily immigration and human rights. She provides advice and advocacy in all aspects of immigration and asylum. She appears regularly for the Secretary of State for the Home Department. In 2015 Mary was appointed to the ‘B’ Panel of treasury civil counsel extended to 2023 (for time away from the Bar to have a family), having previously been appointed to the C Panel in 2009. HN & SA (Afghanistan) (Lead Cases Associated Non-Lead Cases), R (on the application of) v SSHD [2016] EWCA Civ 12, Naizir and others v SSHD [2015] UKUT 00437, Islam v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 312, Mohammed R (on the application of) v SSHD [2014] EWHC 1405 (Admin), Jones v Jones (Queen’s Proctor intervening) [2013] (unreported), R (on the application of Khan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1294(Admin), R (on the application of Wankuama) v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2012] EWHC 3526 (Admin), R (On the application of K) v Entry Clearance Officer, Tashkent [2012] EWHC 2875 (Admin), Sher Afzal v SSHD (2012) EWHC 1487

Michael Mullin

Michael is an experienced barrister and part-time judge specialising in property and public law. He accepts instructions across all areas of property law and also maintains a regulatory & public law practice, with a particular focus on public sector decision making relating to housing. Michael was appointed to as a part-time judge of the First Tier Tribunal, Property Chamber in January 2019. Before joining Chambers, Michael was in employed practice for a number of high-profile public-sector bodies including: 3 prominent London Boroughs, a large Housing Association, Transport for London, the Greater London Authority and the Mayor’s Office. Social Housing: Michael is head of the social housing practice group in chambers and is instructed in all areas of housing including: complex possession claims, disrepair, leasehold disputes, licensing appeals, anti-social behaviour, and disputes over tenancy deposit schemes. He regularly appears in the County Court and the High Court for landlords and tenants from the public and private sectors. He is also regularly instructed to prosecute and defend housing regulatory prosecutions in the criminal courts, including prosecutions under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and offences under the Housing Act 2004. Property Litigation: Michael has substantial experience of real property and landlord and tenant litigation. He is frequently instructed to provide advice to solicitors and via direct access regarding: rights of way, boundary disputes and party wall matters. He is also experienced in providing advice and representation to private individuals, Housing Associations, Local Authorities and management companies in relation to forfeiture, service charge disputes, leasehold enfranchisement, and leasehold extension. Public Law: Michael has wide ranging general public law experience with a particular speciality in advising on the lawfulness of decisions made by public sector bodies in a housing context (including Local Authority cabinet decisions and Mayoral decisions). Michael is regularly instructed in s204 appeals and has acted in a range of appeals in relation to intentional homelessness, suitability of accommodation, vulnerability and eligibility. He also provides training on the full range of Homelessness issues including the impact of the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017. Whilst in employed practice Michael had conduct of homelessness matters in the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. Michael has also advised on extensively on public sector housing policy, grant-funding and licensing initiatives and is regularly instructed to appear at the Administrative court on related judicial review proceedings. Reported cases include: Nikolaeva v London Borough of Redbridge[2020] EWCA Civ 1586 R (on the Application of Notting Hill Genesis) v The Camberwell Green Magistrates Court [2019] 5 WLUK 124 Panayiotou v London Borough of Waltham Forest[2017] EWCA Civ 1624

Millie Polimac

Millie is an experienced barrister in property, immigration and employment law. She has a particular interest in litigation with an EU law angle, having worked as a référendaire to the Finnish Advocate General at the Court of Justice of the European Union for 2 years. She is regularly instructed as sole counsel in applications, trials and appeals in a range of courts from the Court of Appeal to the specialist tribunals. Millie has extensive appellate experience, having worked as a judicial assistant in the Court of Appeal for 9 months. In 2019 Millie was appointed to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s panel of Counsel. Property Immigration Employment At the Court of Appeal Millie worked on the following cases in the field of property, housing and public law : R (on the application of Parveen) v Redbridge LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 194 (sole counsel): Whether judge was correct to make no order as to costs following settlement, where no causal link between offer of accommodation and judicial review was established. R (SH) v LB Waltham Forest [2019] EWHC 2618 (Admin) (sole counsel): Whether the main housing duty was properly discharged by two offers of private accommodation. R (SH) v LB Waltham Forest [2019] EWHC 2160 (Admin) (sole counsel): Whether interim relief should be granted pending a final determination in a case concerning a victim of human trafficking. Aldwyck HA v Forward [2019] EWCA Civ 1334 (led by Nicholas Grundy QC): The extent of the application of the PSED in a possession claim brought on reasonableness grounds. Alibkhiet v London Borough of Brent [2018] EWCA Civ 2742; [2019] H.L.R. 15 (led by Nicholas Grundy QC): Extent of the duty to give reasons for out of borough placements where an applicant does not qualify for in borough placement under the council’s policy. Watkins v AMSH [2019] Env. L.R. 2 (sole counsel): Whether proprietary interest needed to establish standing in bringing a private prosecution under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. XPQ v Hammersmith and Fulham [2018] EWHC 1391 (HC); [2018] 4 WLR 102 (led by Nicholas Grundy QC): 5 day trial to establish whether the authority had breached its duties under the EU Anti-Trafficking Directive, Articles 3, 4, and 8 ECHR and/or was negligent when placing a homeless applicant in to sets of accommodation in discharge of their housing duties. Leach v St Albans [2018] EWCA Civ 1616 (sole counsel): whether there was a breach of natural justice to not inform homeless applicant of the right to make representations at an oral hearing Employment Millie is instructed by both companies and individuals in all areas of employment law. She has appeared in multi-day trials at the Employment Tribunal and also has experience of cases before the EAT and the Court of Appeal. Recent experience: At the Court of Appeal Millie worked on the following cases in the field of employment law Shrestha v Genesis Housing Association Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 94 Kiani v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 776 Millie recently acted for the successful respondent in an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal in Odukoya v Hopkins (UKEAT/0251/16/DA). The case involved the question of jurisdiction and time limits for claims brought under the Equality Act 2010. The case can be found here.

Morwenna Macro

Morwenna has particular expertise in insolvency within a wider commercial chancery practice, encompassing company law, trusts, and commercial law, including banking and finance. Morwenna regularly appears in the High Court, with appellate experience in the Court of Appeal, acting for creditors, debtors and IPs, major banks and factors, and high net worth individuals. Her main areas of practice are: Corporate Insolvency Including CVAs, Administration, Voluntary Liquidation, Winding Up, LPA Receivers, Restraining Presentation or Advertisement of Petition, Applications to Appoint Provisional Liquidator, Disputed Petitions, Directors’ Duties and Misfeasance claims, Directors Disqualification, Jurisdiction, Preferences and Transactions at Undervalue. Personal Insolvency Including IVAs, Setting Aside Statutory Demands, Defending Petitions on grounds of Genuine and Substantial Dispute, Annulment of Bankruptcy, Orders for Sale and Co-ownership Disputes, Bankruptcy Restrictions Orders, Preferences, Transactions at an Undervalue, Transactions likely to Defraud Creditors and Remuneration challenges, Professional Negligence and s.304 Claims against Trustees and IPs, Jurisdiction. Factoring & Invoice Discounting Including applications for Summary Judgment, Construction of Contractual Terms, Reliance on Conclusive Evidence Clauses and Enforcement. Guarantees & Indemnities Including applications for Summary Judgment, Construction of Contractual Terms and Enforcement including Bankruptcy. Company Law Including Directors’ Duties, Unfair Prejudice Petitions, Remedies, Shareholder Disputes, Derivative claims and Corporate Insolvency. Consumer Contract & Credit Including Consumer Credit Act claims and enforcement, Claims involving Insolvency, Consumer Regulations, Unfair Terms, Sale of Goods and Supply of Goods and Services Act claims. Trusts Including Quistclose trust type claims, Constructive Trust claims including relating to the family home, Claims for an Account and other Equitable Remedies. Costs Including Detailed Assessment, Costs Budgeting and Costs Management, Relief from Sanctions, and challenging/defending Solicitors bills and fees. Agency Including claims involving Estate Agents, Entitlement to Commission, and Construction of Contract Terms. Asset Recovery Including Retention of Title Clauses, Enforcement, Trusts, Freezing Orders and Injunctions, and Fixed and Floating Charges. Cases include: McLinden v Lu [2021] EWHC 3171 (Ch) | [2021] 11 WLUK 410; Petitioner v Company [2021] EWHC 3249 (Ch); [2021] 12 WLUK 97; Re Blenheim Shipping [2020] 10 WLUK 179; Progresso Ltd & Ors v Legacy Education Alliance Limited [2019] EWHC 3498 (Ch), 2019 WL 07461782 ;

Nicholas Grundy KC

Nicholas Grundy KC is a Property, Public Law and Human Rights specialist. Nick is head of Five Paper’s Real Property Practice Group and is a member of the Housing, Landlord and Tenant and Public Law Groups, his property experience is very wide, ranging from cases where property and public law interact to commercial development. Nick has a focused property practice with particular expertise in: Complex property cases. Applications to discharge or modify restrictive covenants. Possession claims where the occupier asserts Equality or Human Rights. Advising and representing Public Sector bodies on public law and policy issues. Service Charges claims. Business lease renewals. As well as acting in the precedent-setting case of Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd [2015] UKSC 15, the leading case on the correct approach to disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, Nick has enjoyed successes in the Court of Appeal in cases concerning construction of property statutes, including: Global 100 Ltd v Laleva [2021] – CPR 55.8(2); Gateway HA v Ali [2020] EWCA Civ 1339 – the Law of Property (Misc. Provisions) Act 1994, s. 18; LB Haringey v Simawi [2019] EWCA Civ 1770 – rights of succession under the Housing Act 1985; Livewest HA v Bamber [2019] EWCA Civ 1174 – the Housing Act 1988, s. 21(1A) and (1B) and Toms v Ruberry [2019] EWCA Civ 128 – the Law of Property Act 1925, s. 146.

Ololade Saromi

Ololade has a Commercial Chancery practice with a leaning towards banking, finance, commercial, insolvency (corporate and personal), company, and partnership disputes. He provides advice, pleadings, and representation in all of these areas. Ololade is particularly sought after in banking and finance matters and has experience in such disputes where they include allegations of fraud. He has been instructed as sole counsel in the High Court (often in the Chancery Division) and County Court, and also accepts instructions to act as counsel in arbitral proceedings. Prior to commencing practice, Ololade obtained considerable experience of advocacy in the County Court. As such, he offers his clients advocacy experience which exceeds his years in practice. Ololade also spent a year and a half working in a tier 1 specialist litigation team at an international commercial law firm headquartered in the UK. This gives him an awareness of the commercial pressures under which his professional clients operate and sensitivity to the issues involved in managing the expectations of commercial lay clients. Ololade is a recipient of an International Outgoing Scholarship from the Pegasus Scholarship Trust. In 2022, Ololade commenced his scholarship by undertaking a two-month secondment to the Litigation, Dispute Resolution, and Risk Management Department of Aluko & Oyebode – Nigeria’s leading commercial disputes law firm, at its offices in Lagos – the commercial heart of Nigeria. Where required, Ololade is able to bring the insight he gained and the network he developed to bear on cases for the benefit of his clients. Banking and Finance Ololade accepts instructions in relation to the full range of banking and finance disputes. He has recently been instructed to advise, draft, or provide advocacy in relation to: Secured lending disputes. Asset finance / finance leasing. Invoice finance and factoring. Breaches of FSMA 2000. Debt claims. Fraud. Payment services disputes. Enforcement of securities, guarantees, and indemnities. Consumer credit claims. Wrongful interference with goods / conversion. Examples of recent and ongoing cases: Advising, drafting pleadings, and conducting advocacy for an international factoring company based in the USA in a $650,000 claim against one of its clients based in the UK involving issues of fraudulent misrepresentation, procurement of breach of contract, and conspiracy to injure (ongoing). Advising, drafting pleadings, and conducting advocacy in a $500,000 investment-related claim raising issues of undue influence, unconscionable bargain, unjust enrichment, unlawful provision of regulated activities under the Financial Markets and Services Act 2000, joint venture agreements, and recission. The claim has been set for a 7-day High Court trial to be listed in 2023 (ongoing). Advising, drafting pleadings, and conducting advocacy for a large asset-based lender in proceedings to recover over £100,000. The issues that arise include the determination of the governing contractual terms where there are two apparently competing contracts, the effect of redemption statements, unjust enrichment, estoppel by representation, and change of position (ongoing). Commercial Ololade’s recent commercial litigation experience includes instructions to advise, draft, or provide advocacy in relation to: Breach and interpretation of contracts. Undue influence. Misrepresentation. Unconscionable bargain. Rectification. Unjust enrichment and restitution. Joint venture. Limitation. Examples of recent and ongoing cases: Advising, drafting pleadings, and conducting advocacy for a London Borough Council in a claim brought against it by one of its external care services providers for unpaid invoices. Successfully obtained an order setting aside a default judgment of over £100,000. The issues that arise include the identity of the parties to the governing contracts, authority of a partner to enter into deeds on behalf of a partnership, and limitation (ongoing). Advising, drafting pleadings, and conducting advocacy for an international factoring company based in the USA in a $650,000 claim against one of its clients based in the UK involving issues of fraudulent misrepresentation, procurement of breach of contract, and conspiracy to injure (ongoing). Advising, drafting pleadings, and conducting advocacy in a $500,000 investment-related claim raising issues of undue influence, unconscionable bargain, unjust enrichment, unlawful provision of regulated activities under the Financial Markets and Services Act 2000, joint venture agreements, and recission. The claim has been set for a 7-day High Court trial to be listed in 2023 (ongoing). Insolvency Ololade accepts all appropriate instructions, and his recent experience includes: Winding up and bankruptcy petitions. Bankruptcy annulments. Applications for orders for possession and sale. Advising in disputes relating to preferences and transactions at an undervalue. Advising in applications for declarations and an order for possession and sale. Applications to stay writs/warrants of possession. Examples of recent and ongoing cases: Resisting an application to stay a warrant of possession issued pursuant to an order for possession and sale. Represented the trustees in bankruptcy in their application for an order for possession and sale of a property which constituted a part of the bankrupt’s estate but over which a third-party claimed to hold a long lease. Acted for the trustees in bankruptcy in an application to terminate the bankrupt’s spouse’s notice of home rights and to have the notice removed from the register of title for the property. Obtaining orders for the substituted service of bankruptcy petitions. Resisted an application by debtors for additional disclosure by the petitioning creditor. Resisted an application to set aside a statutory demand. Company and Partnership Ololade accepts all appropriate instructions including: Company restorations. Rectification of register. Breaches of directors’ duties. Shareholder disputes. Unfair prejudice petitions. Derivative actions. Partnership disputes. Examples of recent and ongoing cases: Advising, drafting pleadings, and conducting advocacy for a London Borough Council in a claim brought against it by one of its external care services providers for unpaid invoices. Successfully obtained an order setting aside a default judgment of over £100,000. The issues that arise include the identity of the parties to the governing contracts, authority of a partner to enter into deeds on behalf of a partnership, and limitation (ongoing). Drafted company restoration proceedings. Represented a commercial bank in an application to rectify the particulars of a registered debenture it had taken as security for a loan. Advised and represented a hunting club in resisting an application for pre-action disclosure by the hunt’s supporters association. The association was attempting to prevent a merger between the hunt and another hunting club by challenging the validity of a vote at the hunt’s AGM in favour of the merger.

Peter John

Peter John is an experienced civil law barrister at Five Paper Chambers specialising in all aspects of Contentious Probate, Trusts & Property Litigation in the High Court and County Courts. He also advises in all areas of non-contentious probate practice and the preparation of wills. He advises and acts in cases concerning the beneficial ownership of property and Inheritance Act claims, and has experience in all forms of real property disputes. Peter has also successfully represented clients in mediations. Peter John has a great deal of experience as a probate and property practitioner specialising in: Disputes over the validity of Wills Testamentary Capacity and undue influence Deeds of variation and rectification The liability of Estates, Executors and Personal Representatives The construction of Wills Claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family & Dependants) Act 1975 The validity of lifetime gifts Trusts and the beneficial ownership of property Non-contentious probate practice Real property and boundary disputes In the Estate of Michael John Chantrey Inchbald, Deceased – Inchbald v Inchbald & Others[2016] EWHC 3215 (Ch), Jacqueline Aldine Leslie Baroness Killearn v (1) Victor Miles George Aldous Lampson Baron Killearn (2) Sydney Michael Kalinsky (3) Philip Anthony Sapsford (4) Miles Henry Morgan Lampson [2011] EWHC 3775 (Ch), Maurice Clark v (1) Ian Clark (2) Wilfred Clark (As executors of the Estate of Kathleen Clark (Deceased) [2011] EWHC 2746 (Ch), Vivian v Koningsveid Ch D (John Randall QC) 29/10/2010, In the Matter of the Estate of Vera May Gale (Deceased) sub nom Janice Susan Gale v David John Gale[2010] EWHC 1575 (Ch), (1) Bernard Hinton (2) Patricia Hayes v (1) Susanna Leigh (2) Simon Reeve - In the Estate of Victor Reeve, Deceased [2009] EWHC 2658 (Ch) 27.10.09 LTL, Shantaben Durgashanker Bhatt v Hasmita Durgashanker Bhatt & & Others (2009) LTL 3/4/2009, Bedeau v London Borough of Newham [2009] EWHC 293 (QB) LTL 13/3/2009 In the Matter of the Estate of Bertha Hemming (Deceased) sub nom Raymond Saul & Co (A Firm) v (1) Jolyon Holden (as personal representative of Bernard Leslie, Deceased) (2) Louise Mary Britten (as trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of Bernard Leslie Hemming)[2008] EWCH 2731 (Ch) LTL 12/11/2008 [2009] Ch 313, Re Edwin John Watson Deceased - Carr & Others v Beaven & Others [2008] EWCH 2582 (Ch) LTL 5/11/2008, Testamentary capacity and the validity of Wills.Deceased did have testamentary capacity at date of execution of Will despite suffering mild to moderate dementia.Shah v Joshi [2008] All ER (D) 156 (Aug) Validity of Wills – Forgery.Court declared against the validity of a Will on the basis that insufficient evidence of due execution., Clark v Clark & Others [2007] All ER (D) 186 (Dec).Construction of Wills.Construction of a Will and the meaning of a disputed clause concerning the Testatrix's farm.Alan Glanville & Michael Glanville (Executors of the estate of Horace Winston Glanville, Deceased) v Jean Mabel Glanville [2002] EWCH 1271 (Ch) LTL 1/7/2002.Lifetime gifts; undue influence. A deed of gift by the deceased, whereby he transferred his house into the joint names of himself and his wife as beneficial joint tenants, was not vitiated by undue influence.

Rachel Sleeman

Rachel Sleeman is Head of Chambers and the leader of the Insolvency and Company Practice Group at Five Paper. She is an experienced commercial and chancery litigation barrister specialising in the fields of insolvency and asset recovery, including the cross over areas of company law and civil fraud. Rachel has a busy advocacy practice in the High Court and the Court of Appeal, acting as sole and leading counsel. Clients appreciate Rachel’s user-friendly approach and her ability to find commercially realistic solutions. Rachel Sleeman's practice encompasses: Insolvency: Rachel acts for liquidators, administrators, receivers, directors and creditors in corporate insolvency matters both before a company enters into formal insolvency but also as part of the realisation, recovery and sale of assets process. Rachel also advises on all aspects of personal insolvency. She has appeared in the leading reported cases dealing with bankrupts who are mentally incapacitated and also acts for creditors who wish to seek payments of debts from those who lack mental capacity. Commercial: Rachel has particular experience in asset finance/factoring agreements and surrounding litigation; consumer lending transactions; enforcement of charges and costs disputes. She is regularly instructed by the Legal Aid Agency’s Debt Recovery Department in costs and debt recovery claims. Civil Fraud: Rachel is experienced with civil fraud matters, in relation to commercial, banking or corporate. Matters often involve allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and breach of trust, conspiracy, deceit and fraudulent misrepresentation. She is often instructed to obtain Freezing Orders (including where assets are based in other jurisdictions (worldwide)). Reported cases: Re: Premier FX Limited [2021] EWHC 1321 (Ch); Arif v Sanger [2021] EWHC 3475 (QB); Arif v Sanger [2021] EWHC 1183 (QB); Lord Chancellor v John Blavo [2019] 6 WLUK 33; Lord Chancellor v John Blavo [2016] EWHC 126 (QB), Moloobhoy and another v Kanani [2013] Civ 600, Legal Services Commission v Sham Loomba; Legal Services Commission v Ngozi Blessing Ulasi; Legal Services Commission v Simon Anthony Carter & others [2012] EWHA 29 (QB), Marquis Francois-Eudes de Louville de Toucy v (1) Bonhams 1793 Limited (2) The Official Receiver [2011] EWHC 3809 (Ch); (2011) All ER (D) 32, Bright Asset Ltd v Simon Lewis [2011] EWCA Civ 122, Nicola Haworth v (1) Donna Cartmel (Trustee in bankruptcy of Nicola Haworth (2) The Commissioners of HM Revenue and Customs [2011] EWHC 36 (CH),

Roger Laville

Roger specialises in finance, insolvency, company law disputes and civil fraud, and a member of the Commercial Division and our specialist practice groups (Insolvency & Company; Banking Finance (which he is head of group) and Civil Fraud). His finance and insolvency practice encompasses working for all of the major banks, as well as specialist lenders, and insolvency practitioners from leading firms. He is therefore fully familiar with the commercial and reputational factors which corporate clients must take into account, the regulatory framework within which financial services firms operate and the financial imperatives which apply to insolvencies. Fraud, dishonesty and breach of duty by directors are a regular feature of the cases Roger works on, sometimes necessitating injunctive relief, and many involve cross-border inter-jurisdictional issues. Examples of recent matters in which Roger has acted include: acting for the successful claimant in India Infrastructure Finance Company v Surana Power Limited and others and Indian Infrastructure Finance Company v Abhijeet MACD Nagpur Energy Private Limited and others, both multi-million dollar claims to enforce corporate and personal guarantees given in respect of Indian coal fired power station projects and involving the effect in England of Indian liquidation proceedings; advising an international lender about attempts to enforce a Malaysian arbitration award by attaching it to payments due from the lender to its government under a guarantee scheme; obtaining a High Court injunction to freeze a sum of several hundred thousand pounds in a company’s bank account to prevent one of its directors from misappropriating the money; a successful two-day multi-track trial of a claim involving allegations of fraud and forgery; advising a private bank about the applicability of consumer credit legislation to a loan worth over a million pounds; and an application to determine the appropriate law and jurisdiction for a cross-border breach of trust claim. Before joining Five Paper, Roger was a finance litigation partner in a firm of solicitors, handling matters ranging from complex small disputes up to multi-million pound claims. Roger sat on the Bar Council money-laundering working group in 2016 and 2017. Banking and Finance. Roger has for many years dealt with a wide variety of personal, business and corporate banking disputes. His insolvency and company law experience. Proceeds of Crime and Money Laundering. Roger’s reported cases as a solicitor include: John Morris v Royal Bank of Scotland plc Obadare v Barton Bridging Capital Ltd Gatt v Barclays Bank Plc SerVaas Incorporated v Rafidain Bank.

Sam Phillips

Sam is a property and trusts specialist and member of Five Paper’s Property Division. Sam is ranked as a leading individual in both Chambers and Partners and Legal 500. Sam Phillips accepts instructions in all areas of property law, but with particular emphasis on trusts of land, real property and leasehold matters. Sam frequently acts on behalf of private and commercial banks in proceedings relating to charges and mortgages regularly appearing in the County Court, High Court and Property and Land Chambers of the Tribunal. Most recently Sam has acted as sole counsel in the Chancery and Queen’s Bench Divisions of the High Court and appeared in the Court of Appeal, as junior counsel to Nicholas Grundy QC. Before joining Chambers, Sam managed and developed a portfolio of 850 properties in London for one of the largest landlords in the UK. Drawing on his industry experience, Sam provides a clear, accessible and commercially sensible service to clients at all stages of litigation and in mediation. Landlord & Tenant and Social Housing: Acting for landlords and tenants in all areas of commercial property and housing law, particularly contested possession claims, article 8 and proportionality challenges as well as homelessness appeals, obtaining Anti-Social Behaviour Injunctions and enforcement through committal proceedings. Recent experience: Appeared for the successful respondent in a Declaration of Incompatibility claim in the Court of Appeal (led by Nicholas Grundy QC); Obtained £100,000 Unlawful Profits Order resulting from AirBnB lettings; Resisted application for a Declaration of Incompatibility relating to the Housing Act 1985 in the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court. Property Litigation Release from covenants, enforcement of covenants, adverse possession claims, commercial leases, leasehold enfranchisement, injunctions and boundary disputes. Claims arising from Japanese Knotweed and associated issues. Acting for landlords, property managers and RTM companies in the Property Chamber. Recent experience: Resisted an appeal to the Court of Appeal in the matter of Frejek v Frejek on the basis that unwitting breach of a Court order still constitutes contempt of Court Application for release from restrictive covenant in the Upper Tribunal to allow for residential development Resisted an appeal in the B&PC (Chancery Division) relating to beneficial interests determined by a gifted deposit form Acted for the successful Respondent trustees in an appeal in the B&PC (Chancery Division) in a claim for adverse possession of commercial property Trusts Contested applications under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act (TLATA), property disputes arising from contested wills and probate. Recent experience: Successfully argued for findings of contempt of court against the former executor of a will for failure to comply with an order made in the Chancery Division of the High Court; Obtained an order for the removal of an executor and replacement with an independent professional at a contested final hearing in the Chancery Division of the High Court (Birmingham); Defeated a claim under TLATA for a beneficial share of a portfolio of homes in West London; Reported cases include: Thompson and Rickard v Collins & Collins [2020] UKUT 330; [2020] WLUK 179: Thomas v Smalling [2020] EWHC 3816 (Ch); [2020] WLUK 336; Frejek v Frejeck & Foote [2020] EWHC 1181 (Ch); [2020] 5 WLUK 157;LB Haringey v Simawi and Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2019] EWCA (Civ) 1770; [2020] All ER 701; [2020] PTSR 702; [2019] WLUK 445; [2020] HLR 13;

Satinder Gill

Satinder is joint head of the Business Immigration and Regulatory Team with Ian Wright. He is described in the Legal 500 as a business immigration expert and works closely with his solicitors on significant inward investment and migration projects. Satinder works closely with his solicitors for employers and education providers on all aspects of business immigration, including global corporate immigration planning, sponsor licensing, applications under the Points Based System and employer’s liability in the prevention of illegal working. His employer clients range from blue chip companies, professional sports clubs and universities to start ups new to the UK. Satinder works for businesses and education providers investing into the UK, including global corporates, professional sports clubs, UK and international universities, professional service providers, investors and senior executives. Satinder is regularly instructed on project work, including under Tiers 1 and 2 of the PBS and in sponsor licensing. He presents seminars on business immigration nationally and is a regular speaker at the annual MBL business immigration conference. Satinder is on the consultation board for PLC’s business immigration content and has posted recent webinars for Lexis Nexis and PLC on the UK’s future immigration system and on Brexit and Appendix EU. Satinder is a very experienced work and employment lawyer for businesses, with particular expertise in discrimination, TUPE, restrictive covenants, breach of confidentiality and partnership dispute cases. He has also represented educational institutions in a number of discrimination claims in the civil courts. Adama and Partnerships in Care Ltd [2014] UKEAT 0047/14/1206, Sanders and Newham Sixth Form College [2014] EWCA Civ 734, Okoro and Taylor Woodrow [EWCA] Civ 1590 [2013] ICR 580, McCabe and Cornwall County Council [2002] EWCA Civ 1887 [2003] IRLR 87, Virk and Gan Life Holdings plc [2000] Lloyd’s Rep IR 159 CA, Rafiq and Secretary of State for the Home Department [1998] Imm AR 193 CA

Sean Pettit

Sean is an established property law barrister with over 20 years of experience in all areas of the law pertaining to Real Property and Landlord and Tenant law and has represented clients at every level of tribunal including numerous landmark cases in the Court of Appeal. Prior to his recent return to the Bar, Sean spent 2 years as a consultant at a firm solicitors specialising in Property and Telecommunications law, advising on Real Property and Landlord & Tenant matters, including leases, licences, wayleaves and property-related issues arising in the context of the Electronic Communications Codes. Sean has particular experience in leaseholds and tenancies: disrepair and dilapidations, unlawful eviction, residential landlord and tenant, commercial landlord and tenant, business tenancies, mobile homes, easements, trusts of land and estoppel. In the context of Local Government Housing, Sean has considerable experience in Statutory Appeals, Judicial Review and cases involving Public Law, Human Rights and EC Law issues. For a number of years, Sean taught Land law and Trusts at the London School of Economics. Local Government & Housing Sean has a wealth of experience in the Public Law realm of social housing, representing both Applicants and Respondents in Judicial Review, Statutory Appeals and in the Court of Appeal. This experience means that Sean can provide solid, practical advise in how to best deal with these cases, taking into account the wider context in which they arise and the latest developments in law and practice. Reported cases include: Panayiotou v London Borough of Waltham Forest, Smith v London Borough of Haringey (2017 CA) Homelessness appeal on the meaning of ‘significantly’ post Hotak; and the contracting out of part VII decision-making. Falastin Amin v London Borough of Brent (7/7/2011) LAG Homelessness Appeal turning on the definition of ‘worker’ within the meaning of Article 39 of the Treaty of Rome. Leon Denton v Southwark London Borough Council [2007] EWCA Civ 623 (CA) Homelessness. Whether it was reasonable for a homeless person to continue to occupy accommodation the family home. Landlord & Tenant Sean has acted for both landlords and tenants in the full gamut of tenancy-related work – both residential and commercial. Sean’s expertise includes all grounds of possession against statutory and contractual tenants, claims arising out of disrepair, dilapidations, protection from eviction, rent reviews, service charges, breach of contract, business tenancies, long leases, Right to Buy, Mobile Homes, housing co-operatives, trespass, Guardian schemes. Sean has an interest in new technology and is regularly consulted by solicitors specialising in IT and Telecommunications law, in particular advising on property-related issues arising from leases, wayleaves and the Electronic Communications Codes. Real Property Sean has considerable experience acting for parties in neighbour disputes, and disputes arising from the Party Wall Act, restrictive covenants, easements, adverse possession, Trusts of Land and estoppel. Recent work: Academies Land Act Transfers Advising in respect of the transfer of schools under the provisions of the Academies Act 201 0. Promissory Estoppel Defending a claim for possession on the grounds of promissory estoppel in a claim brought by a son against his parents. Mobile Homes Act Sean has been instructed in a number of Mobile Homes Disputes. Restrictive Covenants Sean has been instructed in a number of case involving the effect and removal of Restrictive Covenants.

Shane Crawford

Shane Crawford is a specialist employment law barrister who provides a quality of service based on over twenty years’ experience in this field. Forensic attention to detail and precision of advocacy at final hearings are anecdotes describing Shane’s involvement by previous clients. Employment Law Shane’s experience encompasses all areas of employment law issues and he possesses particular expertise in conducting lengthy hearings of complexity through the whole spectrum of discrimination claims and TUPE. The other areas in which he regularly represents clients are whistleblowing, contract, unlawful deduction of wages, national minimum wage, agency and part-time workers claims and unfair dismissal. He is highly regarded in his field and is sought after for his subtlety and assertive presence in tribunal and court. He is attentive to the client’s needs and provides a balanced assessment of merits of a case. Shane’s client base includes private sector respondents and public employers. Shane has a depth of experience in representing claimants from all different professional and trade union backgrounds. Discrimination Shane’s case load includes multi-day discrimination cases. A sample of the cases in which he has been involved are: Nov 2021. Pollard v Aquinas Church of England education trust. Successfully defending Trust in a two-week hearing against allegations of whistleblowing and unfair dismissal in the context of accusations of covering up manipulation of exam results. Sep 2021: Mrs M Fitzmaurice v Luton Irish Forum: EA-2020-000295-RN (Previously UKEATPA/0313/20/RN: Responding to appeal by claimant in whistleblowing case. Mar 2021. K v Middlesex University London. Representing the university in claims by a lecturer of discrimination and whistleblowing alleging fraud. Dec 2021 O v LBC. Responding to appeal by claimant on asserted error of law in test of victimisation. Awaiting EAT judgement. Nov 2021. Gallagher v Bunzl UK Ltd. Successful strikeout application of claims of sexual harassment and constructive unfair dismissal against claimant on basis of vexatious and scandalous conduct by claimant. Jul 2021. Hussain V Santio Ltd. Defending respondent in multi-day discrimination case claimant alleged direct discrimination and harassment based on religion and race by fellow BAME colleagues. Jun 2021. Reid v GQF planning Ltd. Representing a financial advice company in two-week hearing defending claims of unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of non-payment of incentive bonus and breach of contract in respect of pension contributions, sex discrimination and equal pay, constructive unfair dismissal, whistleblowing and victimisation May 2021. Philpott v MUK Services. Successfully defending the claim of s.15 disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, harassment and unfair (constructive) dismissal against a DWP assessor of eligibility for ill health and disability benefits. Apr 2021. NH v S. Representing a national catering and food company in a multi-day hearing against claims of race and religious discrimination and harassment alleged on the basis of subconscious bias amongst management of the same race. Feb 2021. Maruf v Network Rail. Representing claimant, systems analyst, in a two-week hearing of discrimination and harassment. MH v West Mercia Police – successfully representing claimant in 4 week final hearing for claims of discrimination and harassment. EB v LB of Croydon – representing respondent in response to claims of disability and maternity discrimination. JD v Care for U – successfully representing claimant in claims of disability discrimination and unfair dismissal. Hemdan v Ishmail – successfully obtaining deposit order in an allegation of caste discrimination. Hanley and Barnes v Birmingham City Council – successfully representing respondent in a claim for age discrimination. Tully v Council for Voluntary Service Rochdale – successfully representing respondent in a Whistleblowing case. Hadera v Boots Management Services – successfully representing respondent in a claim of race discrimination. Bibb v West Midlands Fire and Rescue Authority – representing claimant in a claim of disability discrimination. Manoj v VF Services – successfully representing respondent in a claim of sexual harassment and victimisation. Williams v E.On – representing respondent in a claim for sex discrimination. Appellate experience He has significant experience of conducting appeals in the EAT having done both pro bono and privately funded cases. Reported cases: R (Badur) v Birmingham Crown Court and others [2006] EWHC 539 (Admin) Carroll v Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime UKEATPA/0203/14/JOJ Nikolova v M & P Enterprises London Ltd UKEAT/0293/15/DM Regulatory Professional conduct and right to practise hearings Shane is experienced in representing individuals appearing before the General Medical Council, National College for Teaching and Leadership and the Conduct and Competence committee Health and Care Professions Council.

Simon Strelitz

Simon is an experienced housing and property practitioner with 18 years’ continuous experience in all aspects of the work undertaken across the Property Division. He is also an Accredited Mediator for Commercial and Civil matters. He joined Five Paper on 1 July 2021 having previously been at a specialist housing and property set between 2002 and 2011. Subsequently, for the last 10 years he has worked as an in-house barrister, initially at Clarke Willmott LLP and, most recently, Capsticks Solicitors LLP where he acted for multiple social landlords on a range of housing and property issues. During his time at these firms he worked on a number of high profile housing cases including Aster Communities v. Ackerman Livingstone [2015] UKSC 15. He has considerable experience of advising social housing clients on a wide range of contentious and non-contentious matters, as well as appearing in courts at all levels from the County Court to the Court of Appeal, and the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and Upper Tribunal. Simon enjoys training officers working for social housing providers and seek to explain things in a down-to-earth and digestible way. He has spoken at national housing events and delivered bespoke training to providers, often assisting clients to reduce the costs of and exposure to litigation and, wherever possible, keep cases out of court. Social Housing Simon specialises is all aspects of social housing including disrepair. His work has regularly involved him appearing in possession, injunction and committal (contempt) proceedings involving issues across the spectrum of housing law (including Equality Act 2010 and Human rights issues). In addition to his work with housing providers in England and Wales, he has gained considerable experience in wider aspects of Housing & Asset Management including advising on and drafting tenancies, and a range of policies and procedures, and training officers and staff on a range of issues including preventing and dealing with judicial review, human rights and Equality Act 2010 challenges. Simon has an astute eye for the commerciality of a case and knows the importance to social housing clients of making best use of their legal budgets. Notable cases include: Bamber v. LiveWest Homes Ltd [2018] EWHC 2454 (QB) Simon appeared for the successful Respondent at first instance and in an appeal concerning the validity of using a s.21 notice giving two months’ notice – as opposed to requiring the six months’ otherwise required under ss.21(1A) and (1B) – so as to exercise a break-clause in a fixed term tenancy of two or more years and recover possession under the s.21 procedure. Biddlecombe v. Vectis Housing Association [2020] EWHC 770 (QB) Simon appeared for the successful Respondent landlord at first instance and on appeal. The primary ground of appeal concerned the extent to which a complete failure by a social landlord to consider the Public Sector Equality Duty was fatal to a claim for possession where the court had sufficient factual material before it to demonstrate that it would have made no difference to the landlord’s decision to seek possession. Permission to appeal was granted by the High Court in the above case prior to either the High Court or Court of Appeal decisions in Forward v. Aldwyck Housing Group Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 1334 in which Nicholas Grundy QC and Millie Polimac appeared. Simon also appeared at first instance in the following cases whilst working as an in-house barrister before instructing Nicholas Grundy QC for the appellate stages: Southend-on-Sea BC v. Armour [2014] EWCA Civ 231 Simon appeared for Southend-on-Sea BC at first instance. This case concerned the extent to which the court was entitled to take into account the lack of further complaints of ASB after the issue of possession proceedings when considering the proportionality of making a mandatory possession order against an Introductory Tenant. Ackerman-Livingstone v. Aster Communities [2015] UKSC 15 Simon appeared for Aster at first instance and obtained a possession order after seeking the summary dismissal of a defence under s.15 of the Equality Act 2010: the case considered the extent to which unlawful discrimination defences under the 2010 Act can be determined by county court judges in the same summary way as defences under Article 8. The Court of Appeal answered in the affirmative; the Supreme Court held otherwise but still dismissed the appeal on the facts of the case. Landlord & Tenant Simon has 18 years’ continuous experience of acting for landlords and tenants across all areas of residential Landlord and Tenant law, with an emphasis on social housing. He has worked predominantly for Housing Associations, local authorities, other social housing providers, as well as private landlords with multiple properties in England and/or Wales. He has experience in leasehold management and service charge disputes and has appeared in the FTT (Property Chamber) in a number of service charge disputes and applications for dispensation from consultation requirements. He has also assisted clients in a number of service charge mediations (both those arranged through the FTT(PC) mediation scheme and arranged privately). As well as advising and appearing for registered providers on leasehold interpretation, consultation and service charge disputes, he has undertaken cutting-edge advisory work on tenancies, policies and procedures. Always with an eye for reducing challenges and legal expenditure, he has worked closely with a number of housing providers to develop procedures aimed at increasing transparency in the presentation of service charge accounts and materials so as to ‘stave off’ challenges in the FTT (PC). Homelessness and Allocations, and Public Law Simon has undertaken work across all aspects of Parts 6 and 7 of the Housing Act 1996 for tenants and local authorities both in England and in Wales. He has considerable experience of public law issues in private law claims as well as litigation involving discrimination, public sector equality arguments and reasonable adjustments. He previously taught courses for BPP which focussed on judicial review in housing and planning areas targeted to trainee and junior solicitors, in-house lawyers and other legal professionals). Real Property and Planning Simon’s work in this area has continued to involve advising and representing clients in boundary and party wall disputes, and in matters involving restrictive covenants and easements. He has been involved in advising on issues of land compensation and compulsory purchase – including businesses facing compulsory purchase orders as part of the redevelopment of Stratford in preparation for the London 2012 Olympics. His work in this area has often built on his previous planning experience which, itself, has included representing clients in appeals against planning enforcement notices and statutory appeals. He has also previously advised and acted on matters involving property-related inheritance, trusts and vesting order applications.

Sonia Rai

Sonia is an experienced property, including housing, specialist and has experience in all aspects of Property Litigation as well as Landlord and Tenant. Sonia undertakes work in all areas of property litigation with a particular interest in real property disputes involving restrictive covenants and easements, leasehold enfranchisement and service charges. Sonia deals effectively with all property disputes and well known for her robust cross-examination and concise closing submissions. She is a pragmatic litigator and will argue her client’s case while also ensuring that the best course of action is taken for her client. Sonia does accept direct access instructions in appropriate cases. Before she came to the Bar, she was a qualified pharmacist. Property Litigation Sonia has acted for corporate and individual owners of commercial and residential property in a wide range of property litigation. The cases that she has been involved in include rights of way, parking issues, restrictive covenants and easements, boundary disputes, and obtaining injunctions against persons unknown. Recent Work Brent LBC v Malvern Mews Tenants Association Ltd [2020] EWHC 1024 (Ch). Sonia represented Brent LBC to resist a negative declaration as to an easement. Lennon v Elliott and Elliott (2020) Luton County Court, successfully reached an agreement as to the ownership and the responsibility for repair of a boundary wall. LB Haringey v Zone Gym (2020) Highgate Corner Magistrates Court, successfully appeared for a local authority to close a gym in breach of Covid-19 regulations. LB Tower Hamlets v PU (2020) obtaining an injunction against persons unknown from the basement of a block of flats. Westminster CC v PU (2020) obtaining an injunction against persons unknown that behave anti-socially, from a housing estate. Advising a leaseholder as to the extent of a covenant to park in the communal areas. Advising an individual as to the legal remedies available in relation to rights of way and restrictive covenants in relation parking and obstructions. Landlord & Tenant Sonia has acted for landlords and tenants of commercial and residential property both in the private and public sectors. Her recent work includes leasehold enfranchisement, service charge disputes, possession, injunctions, forfeiture, unlawful subletting, tenancy fraud, and disrepair and dilapidations. Recent Work Successfully acted for a landlord in forfeiting a lease due to non-payment of service charges. Successfully acted for a tenant in the appointment of a manager in the Lower Tier Tribunal. Advising a landlord in regard to a modification of a term in the lease in relation to service charges.

Stephen Evans

Stephen specialises in Property Law, with particular expertise in the field of Social Housing. He is recommended in the latest editions of both Chambers and Partners and The Legal 500, the editors of which say: "He provides very clear and consistent advice" "He is especially praised for his technical understanding of complex areas of housing law, such as disability discrimination" "My clients ask for Stephen because he gets excellent results, and he is an expert on particularly ground-breaking areas" Stephen is Chambers’ Practice Team Leader for Property and Housing. Stephen acts predominantly for landlords and owner-occupiers, but welcomes instructions from tenants and lessees. He has a broad property practice, with expertise in: Housing Public Law and Judicial review of local authority decisions (homelessness) Disability discrimination Local Government Real property Commercial landlord and tenant Tompkins v LB Wandsworth [2015] EWCA Civ 846, Mohamoud v RBKC; Bushra Saleem v LB Wandsworth [2015] EWCA Civ 780, Lane v RB Kensington & Chelsea [2013] All ER (D) 233 (Apr), QBD Equality Act/Article 8 ECHR, IAM Group Plc v Chowdrey [2012] EWCA Civ 505, London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm [2008] 3 WLR 269, Church Commissioners for England v. Meya [2007] HLR 4, R (Bibi) v. Camden LBC [2005] HLR 1, London Borough of Newham v. Jones [2002] EWCA Civ. 1779, R (B) v LB Camden (6.5.15), Nugee J

Terence Gallivan

Terry is an experienced practitioner in property, social housing, local government and judicial review. His practice includes trial advocacy as well as appeals in the higher appellate courts. He has a substantial advisory practice. Terry accepts instructions directly from individuals in suitable cases. Description of Practice Landlord and Tenant/Housing Property Homelessness Judicial Review Local Government R (Ariemuguvbe) v Islington LBC [2009] EWHC 470 (Admin); [2009] P.T.S.R. (C.S.) 39; [2009] EWCA Civ 1308; [2010] H.L.R. 14 (judicial review; allocation of local authority housing; overcrowding; immigration), Wandsworth LBC v Dixon [2009] EWHC 27 (Admin); [2009] L. & T.R. 28 (landlord and tenant; joint tenants; possession; human rights), Doherty v Birmingham City Council [2008] UKHL 57; [2009] 1 A.C. 367 (gypsies; possession; human rights), Manchester City Council v Benjamin [2008] EWCA Civ 189; [2009] 1 W.L.R. 2202 (landlord and tenant; secure tenancies; right to buy; possession; suitable alternative accommodation),Islington LBC v Uckac [2004] EWCA Civ 926; [2005] Q.B. 352 ; [2006] EWCA Civ 340; [2006] 1 W.L.R. 1303 (landlord and tenant; secure tenancy; assignment; fraud; possession; rescission), Kay v Lambeth LBC [2006] UKHL 10; [2006] 2 A.C. 465 (landlord and tenant; possession; article 8; precedent), Islington LBC v Green [2005] EWCA Civ 56; [2005] H.L.R. 35 (landlord and tenant; housing associations; licenses; secure tenancies; subtenancies; termination; possession), McDonald v Ealing LBC (2001) 58 B.M.L.R. 210 (EAT) (employment; disability discrimination; codes of practice), Bruton v London & Quadrant Housing Trust [1998] Q.B. 834, CA; [2000] 1 A.C. 406 (HL(E)) (landlord and tenant; lease/licence; possession), Ali v Westminster City Council [1999] 1 W.L.R. 384, CA. (homelessness; county courts; injunctions; local authorities’ powers and duties), Camden LBC v Gilsenan (1999) 31 H.L.R. 81, CA. (landlord and tenant; nuisance/asb; possession; undertakings; visitors), Ujima Housing Association v Ansah (1998) 30 H.L.R. 831, CA (landlord and tenant; assured tenancies; sub-letting; possession), R. v Islington LBC Ex p. Degnan (1998) 30 H.L.R. 723, CA (homelessness; suitability of accommodation), R. v Wolverhampton MBC Ex p. Watters (1997) 29 H.L.R. 931, CA (housing; local government; asonable preference), R. v Brent LBC Ex p. Baruwa (1996) 28 H.L.R. 361, QBD; (1997) 29 H.L.R. 915, CA (homelessness; intentionality; reasons), R. v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex p. Hargreaves [1996] C.O.D. 168, DCt; [1997] 1 W.L.R. 906, CA (prisoners; policy; legitimate expectation), R. v Westminster City Council Ex p. Obeid (1997) 29 H.L.R. 389, QBD (homelessness; intentionality), R. v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex p. Arulanandam [1996] Imm. A.R. 587, CA (immigration; asylum), R. v Lambeth LBC Ex p. Wilson (1997) 29 H.L.R. 104, QBD (homelessness; costs), R. v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex p. Virk (No.2) [1996] C.O.D. 134, QBD, R. v Brent LBC Ex p. Awua (1993) 25 H.L.R. 626, QBD; (1994) 26 H.L.R. 539, CA; [1996] A.C. 5, HL(E) (homelessness; intentionality), Hackney LBC v White (1996) 28 H.L.R. 219, CA (possession; warrants), Mohamed v Manek (1995) 27 H.L.R. 439, CA, (possession; eviction), Brent LBC v Carmel (1996) 28 H.L.R. 203, CA (disrepair; damages; procedure), R. v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex p. Khan (Rehmat) [1995] 2 All E.R. 540, CA (immigration; asylum; illegal entrants; removal), R. v Tower Hamlets LBC Ex p. Kaur (1994) 26 H.L.R. 597, QBD (homelessness; suitability of accommodation), R. v Wandsworth LBC Ex p. Onwudiwe (1994) 26 H.L.R. 302, CA (homelessness; intentionality; mortgages), Patterson v Greenwich LBC (1994) 26 H.L.R. 159, CA (homelessness; intentionality; domestic violence), R. v Brent LBC Ex p. McManus (1993) 25 H.L.R. 643, QBD (homelessness; intentionality), R. v Tower Hamlets LBC Ex p. Khatun (1995) 27 H.L.R. 344, CA (homelessness; intentionality; acquiescence; spouses), R. v Westminster City Council Ex p. Bishop (1993) 25 H.L.R. 459, CA (homelessness; intentionality), R. v Tower Hamlets LBC Ex p. Ali (Mohib) (1993) 25 H.L.R. 218, QBD (housing; homelessness; allocation of accommodation), Leslie v Howe [1993] N.P.C. 23, CA (landlord and tenant; surrender), R. v Tower Hamlets LBC Ex p. Abbas Ali (1993) 25 H.L.R. 158, CA (homelessness; intentionality ), R. v Westminster City Council Ex p. Ali (1993) 25 H.L.R. 109, QBD (homelessness; intentionality; enquiries), R. v Tower Hamlets LBC Ex p. Begum (Ferdous) [1993] Q.B. 447, CA (homelessness; applications; capacity; learning disabled applicant), Brent LBC v Sharma (1993) 25 H.L.R. 257, CA (landlord and tenant; surrender), Brent LBC v O'Bryan (1993) 65 P. & C.R. 258, CA (landlord and tenant; offer and acceptance; formation of tenancy), Camden LBC v Shortlife Community Housing Ltd (1993) 25 H.L.R. 330, Ch.D (landlord and tenant; short-life housing; tenancy/licence), R. v Brent LBC Ex p. Omar (1991) 23 H.L.R. 446, QBD (homelessness; suitability of accommodation), R. v Tower Hamlets LBC Ex p. Bibi (1991) 23 H.L.R. 500, QBD, (homelessness; intentionality), R. v Ealing LBC Ex p. Salmons (1991) 23 H.L.R. 272, QBD, (homelessness; intentionality; arrears), Nunn v Dalrymple (1989) 21 H.L.R. 569, CA (landlord and tenant; intent to create legal relations; tenancy/licence), Stribling v Wickham (1989) 21 H.L.R. 381, CA (landlord and tenant; sharing arrangements; tenancy/licence), R. v Inner London Crown Court Ex p. Bentham [1989] 1 W.L.R. 408, DCt (judicial review; eligibility for legal aid), R. v Rent Officer for Camden LBC Ex p. Felix (1989) 21 H.L.R. 34, QBD (landlord and tenant; judicial review; fair rent), Hadjiloucas v Crean [1988] 1 W.L.R. 1006, CA (landlord and tenant; tenancy/licence), Swanbrae Ltd v Elliott (1987) 19 H.L.R. 86, CA (landlord and tenant; succession)

Tiernan Fitzgibbon

Tiernan joined Five Paper in 2019 following completion of a 12 month pupillage. During pupillage, Tiernan was supervised by Simon Mills and Roger Laville (Commercial Team) and Ben Maltz, Sam Phillips and Nick Grundy QC (Property Team). Before joining the Bar, Tiernan was a Solicitor-Advocate (Civil) specialising in commercial litigation and arbitration. He trained at Allen & Overy LLP and on qualification joined Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP where he spent the next four years in practice. Tiernan spent his first two years in practice in the Dubai office of Gibson Dunn where he gained considerable exposure to both DIFC and English Commercial Court litigation, international arbitration and also undertook a three month secondment in-house as General Counsel for a Saudi stock market listed firm. On returning to Gibson Dunn’s London office, his practice focused more on English law governed disputes such as the equal value pay claim brought by shop staff against ASDA; Asda Stores Ltd v Brierley and other [2019] EWCA Civ 44. Commercial & Insolvency Building on his prior experience as a commercial litigation solicitor, Tiernan has a thriving commercial practice encompassing claims related to: Sale of goods, and supply of goods and services; Breach of contract, and all matters involving interpretation of contracts; Assignment of debts, and any other chose in action; and Corporate and Personal Insolvency. Recent instructions have included: Acted, as junior to Roger Laville, on behalf of the liquidators of a company in successfully obtaining a freezing injunction relying on evidence contained in “without prejudice” correspondence using the “unambiguous impropriety” exception recently expanded upon by the Court of Appeal in Motorola Solutions, Inc & Anor v Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd & Anor (Rev 1) [2021] EWCA Civ 11. Instructed to advise on and draft the pleadings involved in a case of repudiatory breach in circumstances where both frustration and force majeure were argued as defences arising out of the Covid-19 Pandemic resulting in a successful settlement in favour of the client. Successfully appealed a first instance decision on damages arising from a breach of contract resulting in the reduction of the sum awarded by a third. Instructed from the Junior Junior panel to advise the Institute of Apprenticeships on a potential contractual dispute. Advising on the validity of a potential Part 36 settlement offer and drafting the Particulars of Claim for breach of the settlement offer; Property Litigation Tiernan has extensive experience in property disputes and is regularly instructed by both private and public landlords to appear in the County Courts and the First-Tier Tribunal on cases including: Possession claims; Disrepair claims; Service charge disputes; and Housing related injunctions (both with and without notice). Recent instructions have included: Instructed to resist an application to set aside an access injunction brought on grounds that the claim had not been validly served on a Defendant who had failed to update their address for correspondence. Instructed, as junior to Nicholas Grundy QC, to review a multimillion purchase of land with a view to potentially bringing a claim in respect of sales overage against real estate developers. Successfully representing a public authority in a Fast Track trial related to a possession claim involving consideration of both public law issues and defences under the ECHR; Appearing before the First Tier Tribunal for a landlord in a service charge matter relating to the recovery of sums falling due for major construction works;

Tina Conlan

Tina Conlan’s practice comprises all aspects of housing and property law. She regularly appears in and/ or advises upon public law matters including homelessness appeals, litigation involving the allocation of housing under Part VI of the Housing Act 1996 and judicial review claims. She is qualified to accept direct access instructions. R (Kuznetsov) v Camden LBC [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin), Kannan v Newham LBC [2019] EWCA Civ 57, Harris v Hounslow LBC [2017] EWCA Civ 1476, Ahern v Southern Housing Group, Webb v Wandsworth LBC [2008] EWCA 1643, Arabhalvaei v Rezaeipoor (Central London County Court) December 2007 Legal Action 30 and January 2008 Legal Action 36.

Tristan Salter

Tristan has a busy Commercial Chancery practice combining his knowledge of the property, trusts and insolvency sectors. Tristan accepts instructions in all aspects of property law with a focus on real property, leasehold and trusts of land. He is also able to advise on the frequent cross-over of property issues into the realm of company law or insolvency, advising on shareholder rights in property companies or the complex issues that emerge when a landlord or tenant has become insolvent. From 1 September 2021 Tristan has been appointed to the Attorney General’s Civil C Panel of Counsel and acts for a range of Government departments on property, commercial and insolvency issues. Property Litigation Tristan in instructed across the range of Property issues from real property to landlord and tenant litigation. He frequently is instructed to deal with complex issues involving leasehold matters, boundary disputes and trusts of land. Tristan is regularly instructed to appear in the County Court, First Tier Tribunal and High Court. Recent cases include: Drafting pleadings in relation to long running boundary dispute which included issues relating to damage caused by roots systems Advising on the implications on the impact of Duval on a premium for consent to alterations; Advising on prospects of injunction to secure completion of sale of a property; Advising a Right to Manage company in relation to on-going obligations in relation to a listed building; Advising and drafting pleadings on a dilapidation claim which stemmed from earlier litigation in which he successfully defeated a tenant’s claim under the 1954 Act for a new tenancy; Advising on implication of FirstPort v Settlers Court on RTMs across a London Borough; Landlord & Tenant Tristan frequently acts in the commercial and residential property landlord and tenant disputes ranging from commercial forfeiture, lease renewals to complex possession proceedings involving the Equality Act 2010. Tristan has particular expertise in Shared Ownership cases, advising on the rights under such products including issues in relation to sub-letting, ASB and mortgages. Tristan was junior counsel to Nicholas Grundy QC in the Court of Appeal, in the case of Livewest Homes Ltd v Bamber [2019] EWCA Civ 1174 on the issue of serving notices under s21(1A) & (1B) at the end of a fixed term tenancy. Commercial There is a significant cross over between Tristan’s Commercial and Property practice. He has acted in a range of commercial disputes and uses his expertise in Property law to advise on issues involving commercial and residential property, including: The impact and rights of landlords under the Commercial Rent (Coronavirus) Act 2022 Telecoms rights under the Schedule 3A of the Electronic Communications Code; the enforcement of rental guarantees in commercial and residential tenancies; director’s duties in a company specialising in Property development; shareholder disputes including drafting a claim for unfair prejudice in relation to residential management companies; the enforcement of mortgages, including Shared Ownership mortgages;Tristan often acts in cases involving mortgage regulation, be that under CCA 74 or FSMA 2000.Recent work includes: Insolvency Tristan is regularly instructed to appear in insolvency proceedings for creditors, debtors, companies and office holders. He has recently been appointed the C Panel and undertakes work for HMRC in relation to bankruptcy. Trusts, Wills & Probate Tristan acts on a range of applications under Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 including the challenges to beneficial interest in property alongside contentious wills and probate issues. Recent work includes: Advising on unfair prejudice within lifetime transactions and the status of a contested Will; Advising and drafting on a contested application under s14 TOLATA 96 for an order for sale; Representing a former cohabitee in an attempt to establish an interest in a property; Advising on claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975; Tristan uses his experience in property matters to assist where there are overlapping issues from insolvency proceedings. Recent work includes: Dealing with the annulment of bankruptcy orders under s282(1)(a) due to lack of capacity. Acting for a Bankrupt to resist sale of family home; Advising on challenges to Breathing Space Moratoriums; Advising client on issues stemming from landlord’s insolvency; Advising Administrators on disclaimer of onerous property; Jurisdictional issues in insolvency proceedings;

Vinesh Mistry

Vinesh joined Five Paper in September 2022 and specialises in commercial litigation, property (including property damage) and landlord and tenant. Prior to joining Chambers, Vinesh was an employed barrister at a number of multi-national law firms, most recently DAC Beachcroft in London. Vinesh has always provided traditional barrister services to both claimants and defendants; he appears before the County Court and the High Court in interlocutory and final hearings, advises in matters and settles pleadings. Before embarking on a career at the Bar, Vinesh was a County Court Advocate and worked as a paralegal for HMRC. His unusual entry to the Bar has allowed Vinesh to gain a unique insight into the lawyer-client dynamic, with this insight influencing his case strategy and approach. Vinesh enjoys a paper and court practice of equal strength and has been praised for his robust oral advocacy. Commercial Vinesh is a specialist commercial barrister and is regularly instructed in matters beyond his Year of Call. His time as an employed barrister exposed him to a breadth of commercial matters: international arbitration (ICC and others), passing off, director’s duties and shareholder disputes (SMEs) and market loss claims. His previous employment at HMRC gave him a deep understanding of accounting, corporate structures and case investigation. The combination of Vinesh’s experiences give him a pragmatic understanding of commercial claims and the realities that surround them. Prior to joining the Bar, Vinesh worked for a business intelligence company that operated throughout the world. This gave him a solid grounding in the culture and corporate customs of other countries. Vinesh has since developed on this. Representing foreign clients either as sole counsel or as part of a team, Vinesh has a strong grasp of international practice. He has extensively worked with clients from Asia (including the Southeast) and his cases have been administered in the ICC and AIAC arbitration centres. Property and Property Damage A mainstay of his practice, Vinesh has extensive experience of property and property damage claims. He has been instructed by a number of major UK insurance companies to bring and defend claims involving defective workmanship / construction (including claims under the Defective Premises Act 1972), damage caused by flood, fire and impact and natural nuisances (invasive plants). Vinesh’s practice also extends to real property. He has conducted a substantial number of mortgage possession hearings and has advised on party wall matters. Recent work includes: advised on the ownership of land following the collapse of a part of a building; settled appeal documents and other pleadings in a £2 million mortgage possession claim; settled pleadings in and conducted the mediation of a claim for losses caused by a substantial landslide near a railway embankment; Landlord & Tenant Vinesh is instructed in landlord and tenant matters. He has conducted a wealth of possession hearings (sections 8 and 21 notices) and has also settled pleadings in disrepair claims (including breaches of the Defective Premises Act 1972).

Legal 500

Our Team

FAQs

Marketing Resources

Newsletters

Contact us