Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The claimant validly rescinded the contract after the first defendant's failure to complete, was entitled to retain the deposit, and the first defendant had no proprietary interest or equitable lien justifying unilateral notices. The defendants' conduct warranted summary judgment, injunctive relief, and indemnity costs.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal read implied terms into an option agreement over rebuilt restaurant premises, but held B5 Ltd had not used all reasonable endeavours to obtain consent.
B5 Ltd v Vural (OPTION AGREEMENT - unilateral notice - construction of agreement - implied terms) [2026] UKFTT 12 (PC) (05 December 2025)
The Tribunal refused to cancel a unilateral notice protecting an option agreement, holding that implied terms did not displace the notice and that the applicant had not used all reasonable endeavours.
Nationwide Property Developments Ltd v Egbunike (Option agreement - option granted as part of an agreement for respondent to sell applicant's property at a reserve price whilst providing an immediate substantial advance - advance not forthcoming - monetary figures not inserted - whether or not the option is still on foot) [2025] UKFTT 1454 (PC) (17 November 2025)
The tribunal held that the option agreement had fallen away after the applicant failed to provide the promised advance, so no restriction or notice could protect it.
The tribunal held that a property option failed after the applicant did not advance the promised funds, so the option could not be protected by notice or restriction.
Edmunds v Unicam Holdings LLC (UNILATERAL NOTICE - unregistered charge) [2025] UKFTT 1301 (PC) (23 October 2025)
The Tribunal ordered cancellation of a unilateral notice protecting an unregistered charge, holding the applicant’s transfer was a registrable disposition for valuable consideration.
The Tribunal held that the Applicant bought the property for valuable consideration while the Respondent’s charge was unprotected, so the unilateral notice had to be cancelled.
Esmaili v Zubairi (RESTRICTION - charges - unilateral notices) [2025] UKFTT 1300 (PC) (21 October 2025)
The Tribunal held that the respondent did not sign either charge, but ordered rectification to reinstate the 2011 charge because it bound the husband’s beneficial interest.
Rehman v Zahir & Anor [2025] UKFTT 1295 (PC) (03 October 2025)
The tribunal cancelled a unilateral notice and rejected Abdul Rehman’s claim to an interest in 13 Eve Road because he did not attend or prove the alleged contracts.
The Tribunal granted Mr Zahir’s application to cancel a unilateral notice, finding Mr Rehman failed to prove any enforceable property interest.
Explore more
