IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aza/jbsav0/y2016v5i3p249-268.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

K. Perkins v Sheffield City Council [2016]

Author

Listed:
  • Ghasemi, Peyman

Abstract

Thankfully, party wall court cases are relatively low in number, which may be attributed to their prescriptive nature thus operating within well-defined parameters. This means that when the rules are followed, there is little room for error and the parties (often represented by their surveyors) can deal amicably with the relevant matters. However, periodically, unwarranted deviations from the Party Wall Act result in disputes with unpredictable results. The case described in this paper, which was meant to be no more than a routine party wall dispute, illustrates how reckless deviation from a party wall award could result in legal proceedings causing loss of faith in law, undue stress to the adjoining owner and waste of parties’ resources. From start to completion the process took over 15 months and involved three separate in-house lawyers, a barrister, three court hearings (involving two district judges and a deputy district judge) and an inordinate amount of the adjoining owner’s surveyor’s time. As it is often promulgated, there are no clear winners in such cases and even a seemingly outright winner may have lost something through the process.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghasemi, Peyman, 2016. "K. Perkins v Sheffield City Council [2016]," Journal of Building Survey, Appraisal & Valuation, Henry Stewart Publications, vol. 5(3), pages 249-268, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:aza:jbsav0:y:2016:v:5:i:3:p:249-268
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hstalks.com/article/2604/download/
    Download Restriction: Requires a paid subscription for full access.
    File URL: https://hstalks.com/article/2604/
    Download Restriction: Requires a paid subscription for full access.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    The Party Wall Act; easement of eavesdrop; meaning of notifiable works; third surveyor's jurisdiction; undue inconvenience; damages due to diminution in value;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R3 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aza:jbsav0:y:2016:v:5:i:3:p:249-268. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Henry Stewart Talks (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.