“Joseph was excellent and very much impressed those who were present and [we] would definitely be eager to use him again in upcoming hearings.”Instructing Solicitor
Joseph specialises in civil litigation and accepts instructions across the key areas of chambers work. He has a particular interest in property litigation and trusts. He has experience in a variety of cases including possession actions for public and private sector tenancies; contentious probate proceedings; and serious anti-social behaviour. He is very good at dealing with cases which raise technical points of law or procedure and has advised on security of tenure and tenancy fraud.
Before coming to the bar, Joseph appeared in over 500 cases as a solicitor’s agent in the County Court. He appeared in substantive trials as well as many applications for summary judgments, strike-outs, and set-asides. He has acted in applications on very short notice. Solicitors instruct him because he is extremely efficient and able to absorb the details of cases quickly whilst delivering a very high standard of work.
Joseph acts in cases touching on a wide variety of aspects of property law. He often appears in residential landlord and tenant cases, including where public sector tenancies are involved. He has particular expertise in advising housing associations. He also has experience of commercial tenancies and forfeiture claims.
Joseph has acted in many anti-social behaviour cases, securing injunctions and enforcing them through committal proceedings. He has acted for public sector landlords in Part 65 urgent breaches and in the resulting committal trials. He has acted in Part 81 committal proceedings and has previously secured 36 findings of breach in a contested trial.
Joseph also accepts instructions in real property. He has advised on, and represented clients in, boundary disputes and adverse possession claims. He advises on issues relating to easements, freehold covenants, and the rights granted by leases. He also has experience of advising on building disputes.
Joseph is often instructed in cases where there are technical points of law. He is popular with solicitors for his straightforward and efficient approach and is the first point of call for many.
Joseph accepts instructions in contentious and non-contentious probate. He has advised on the construction of wills and on the misuse of trust and estate property. He has also advised on the existence of constructive trusts.
Recently Joseph successfully represented the intervenors in matrimonial finance proceedings who had been accused of hiding matrimonial assets and holding them on trust for the husband: Uddin v Uddin  EWFC 75. In a five-day trial the trust claims were defeated.
He has experience of the link between housing possession cases and trusts, being currently instructed on two cases, one each for landlord and tenant respectively, where possession actions have specific performance counterclaims seeking transfers of property said to be held on trust.
Joseph also accepts instructions on financial provision from estates for family and dependents, particularly under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975.
Joseph is very well suited to probate and trusts disputes, which tend to be legally complex but require clear and concise explanation.
Joseph accepts instructions in all areas of commercial law. He has experience of acting in debt claims, breach of contract claims and in building disputes where he can also draw upon his experience of property disrepair cases. He also has experience of using consumer rights legislation.
He has experience in a variety of disputes where businesses and property interact, such as forfeiture proceedings and matters relating to the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.
Joseph has appeared in the County Courts and the Insolvency and Companies Court in insolvency matters. He accepts instructions in personal and corporate insolvency.
He is popular with solicitors and clients who want clear, commercial advice. He works to short deadlines and understands the importance of managing cases efficiently for businesses.
Joseph regularly acts in personal injury cases on the fast track and small claims track. He accepts instructions from claimants and defendants. He has experience of a range of accidents and injuries, particularly arising from road traffic accidents, and of arguments relating to fundamental dishonesty.
Joseph is building a strong practice in regulatory law, especially where this interacts with his property and commercial practice. He has prosecuted and defended cases under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. He has experience of arguing on the jurisdiction of the court under s82(6), on who is responsible for the nuisance, and on the recoverable costs under s82(12).
Joseph has experience of housing regulation more broadly and has successfully represented clients in rent repayment order proceedings.
He is currently acting as a junior in a case involving reasonable excuse defences to breaches of improvement notices.
To instruct Joseph please contact Greg Piner.
- BA Hons First Class, University of Nottingham, 2016
- Graduate Diploma in Law, City, University of London, 2017
- LLM Bar Professional Training, City, University of London, 2018
- Property Bar Association
- Chancery Bar Association
- Inner Temple BPTC Exhibition Award
- Winner of the Inner Temple Rawlinson Cup Debating Competition, 2019
- Winner of the UKELA Lord Slynn of Hadley Moot, 2018
- Highly Commended, Andrew Lees Essay Prize, 2017
Uddin v Uddin  EWFC 75: Joseph acted for the intervenors in matrimonial finance proceedings, successfully defending the trust claims brought against them in a five-day trial.
T v H: a possession claim following succession to a secure tenancy. Currently defending on reasonableness and public law grounds for unlawful interference with the right to buy; disability discrimination; and convention rights in article 8 and protocol 1 article 1.
N v C: in proceedings for a rent repayment order Joseph secured 100% of the possible rent for the tenants, defeating a reasonable excuse defence and successfully arguing that the conduct of the landlord in the proceedings justified a high award.
Re F: Joseph advised on challenging a will and seeking the return of fraudulently mis-applied estate property decades later.
M v R: Joseph represented the Defendant in a £74,000 rent arrears possession. Mandatory ground 8 was knocked out on procedural grounds. As part of this, Joseph identified and advised on a deposit protection counterclaim.
O v B: a 1-day committal trial in the County Court successfully proving 36 breaches of an injunction.
O v R: In a hearing listed for 1 ½ days Joseph secured and extended an anti-social behaviour injunction against a Defendant accused of threats to kill who contested the facts and alleged discrimination and anti-social behaviour by other tenants.
P v O: defending against a private prosecution under s82 Environmental Protection Act 1990. Joseph successfully argued that there was no proven nuisance at the making of the complaint. The case also involved additional arguments on costs, including whether there was a valid conditional fee agreement or instead no costs had been incurred.