Contact us on

020 7611 4848

email us


Arrange a Callback

Ask a Question


Tuesday, 27 January 2015

Rollingsons launches lease extension calculator

The first question we are asked when we talk to people about extending their lease is usually " How much will this cost me?" and before spending money on a formal valuation we recommend you use a lease extension calculator to give you a guide as to the likely premium you might have to pay. We are delighted to say that we have now launched our own calculator which can be found on our website.

Website Blocking Orders Against ISPs Offer Powerful Protection For Brand Owners

In the last few years, numerous blocking orders have been obtained by music and film copyright owners pursuant to section 97A of the Copyright, Designs & Patents Act 1988. This significant legal development has resulted in Internet Service Providers (ISPs) preventing their customers from accessing peer-to-peer file‐sharing websites. Such websites allow users to select and download various files from an organised directory of content.

In the recent case of Cartier International AG & Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd & Others [2014], the High Court concluded that blocking orders may also be sought in respect of websites selling and advertising counterfeit goods, although there is no statutory equivalent to section 97A. This decision has paved the way to imposing more burdens on ISPs, as it is the first time that blocking orders has been awarded to brand owners in this way.

Monday, 26 January 2015

Time Limits For Bringing Contract Or Negligence Claims

The Limitation Act 1980 is a law that places statutory time limits on the issuing of court claims. According to the act an action must be commenced within the appropriate time limit otherwise it invalid and cannot be issued. It is important to note that once the claim form is lodged at court the limitation time limit no longer applies and the case can take as long as necessary to be resolved.

Friday, 23 January 2015

Motoring Fraud Case Conclusion Reassuring For Insurers

The speedy decision in Aziz v Ali & Others towards the end of 2014 was a reassuring one for insurance companies that have to deal with thousands of fraudulent personal injury claims every year.

The contempt of court hearing brought by the victim insurance company consolidated several separate claims arising from separate incidents. In each instance, a ghost accident was created to claim for compensation for injuries sustained in the apparent accident.

Thursday, 22 January 2015

What are ‘Unless Orders’ And How Do They Secure Litigants’ Compliance?

Litigating parties sometimes question what happens if the other party simply refuses to obey the court. Reassuringly the courts possess an inherent power to regulate and control the procedural regime in order to streamline the courts’ administrative process whilst carrying out substantive justice.

The Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) provide for case management powers to make directions and sanction non-compliance with these directions. In order to secure compliance with directions, especially in the absence of an alternate effective remedy, the court employs ‘Unless Orders’, also known as ‘Hadkinson Orders’ which emerged in the case of Hadkinson v Hadkinson [1952]. 

These coercive orders are passed against parties in contempt or those who fail to comply with a previous court order within deadline. Unless Orders preclude a party from proceeding until they cease their disregard of the court’s authority and agree to abide by the stipulated directions.

Wednesday, 21 January 2015

Contracting With The Correct Party: Misnomers And Contractual Mistakes

If you find an error in a contract it is important to know if that error can be rectified without disrupting the entire agreement. A misnomer, or an inaccurate use of a name, is capable of ruining a contract and carries the possibility of making a contract unenforceable. Based on the misnomer principle a court can determine the meaning and the legal effect of a contract where mistakes are made but past use of the doctrine has not provided a great deal of certainty as to how the courts will interpret it in specific cases.

Tuesday, 13 January 2015

Landlords – failure to protect your tenants deposit could cost you more than money!

There has been a significant increase in landlords who want to obtain possession of their property who did not protect their tenants deposit at the commencement of the tenancy. The deposit must be returned to the tenant before a Section 21 notice requiring possession can be validly served which can result in significant delay.