Real Estate
Raj is well known in the arena of real estate litigation. He has acquired a depth of knowledge and insight having acted for landlords, tenants, developers and local authorities. His directory acknowledgements include:
"He is user friendly, has extremely wide knowledge of the law, and is pragmatic and popular with clients"."Very engaging, extremely personable and has an attractive advocay style."
Chambers UK 2020
"His in-depth knowledge of property law is enviable."
Legal 500 2017
"He is extremely knowledgeable, good with clients and firm with judges."
Chambers UK 2015
"He is technically excellent"
Legal 500 2014
Recent cases
- Katz v Tovagliari Ch.D David Blunt QC (2015 unreported)
Acting successfully for claimant in action for rectification of Lease after the fixed term came. Defendant cross claimed arguing relief should be refused by reason delay, estoppel and hardship.
- Shaw v Grouby [2017] EWCA Civ 233
Represented Respondent in the Court of Appeal after a 6 day trial on legal issues icuding the nature and effectiveness of restrictive covenants, the size of parcels, construction of the transfer, trespass and use of extrinsic evidence. The principal ground of appeal, for which retrial was sought that the trial was conducted unfairly. Appeal was dismissed on all grounds.
- Hyde v Simple Skips [2017] EWHC 3087
Represented Defendant in a damages claim for trespass to land on the ending of a license to operate a waste transfer facility where the principal issue was ascertaining the correct measure of damages.
Public Rights over Land
Raj has successfully acted for landowners, developers and local authorities in challenges to and against manifold public rights over land in the inquiry arena.
"Raj is a sound, sound chancery lawyer and a good performer."
Chambers UK 2018
“He gets on well with clients, is calm and considered in his opinions and often comes up with different approaches to the same problem.”
Chambers UK 2016
“He is extremely knowledgeable, good with clients and firm with judges.”
Chambers UK 2015
Recent Cases:
- Cabletel v Brookwood Cemetery [2002] EWCA 720
Raj acted successfully for the Respondent in a landowners appeal against the right of the cable company to acquire the right to lay cable at a rate fixed by the court. This was the first reported case in the Court of Appeal where the method of ascertaining the value of the right to install apparatus was questioned.
Public Inquiries:
Village Greens
- Freshwater East. The Burrows, Pembrokeshire, West Wales
Acting for a developer against the registration of 30 Hectare of coastland. The application was dismissed principally on the ground that the use was contentious within the inquiry period given amongst other matters that the Applicants had brought a private law claim over the developers building plots asserting the various easement.
- Hawtin Park Fields, Pontllanfraith, Blackwood, South Wales
Raj appeared for the developer of a valuable 24 Acre site that had planning permission granted for over 100 residential units and commercial units. The application rejected as the evidence showed the assertion of linear rights of access as opposed to recreational use over the wider area. Additonally, access had been taken by breaching hedgerows and fences.
- Hunters Moon Green, Dartington, Devon
Raj acted for a charity landowner where registration was sought over two parcels bisected by public path. The owner intended to build housing as infill. The application was defeated on the basis that use was had by breaching hedgerows and in defiance of signage.
- Westward Ho, The Park, North Devon
Acting for a local authority who intended to take the 0.6 hectare and utilise 60% of it for infill housing and use the balance as a recreational facility. The application was defeated on the basis that the land had been acquired under powers that intended recreational use and also use was contentious.
Highways
- Wighill Lane, Tadcaster, Yorkshire
Raj acted for a private land owner in a 3-week inquiry with over 40 witnesses called. The claim for a deemed dedication under the Highways Act 1980 was defeated. The claim at common law was also defeated because the land was in mortgage and subject to an overage covenant for a significant part of the time when common law dedication was to be inferred. Further, the right had been brought into question in 2003 by closure meant absent the new owner throwing open the right he was entitled to rely on his predecessor having made any right of way contentious.