“Joe did a smashing job today. Settled the whole matter for everything we wanted. I'll be looking to work with him again. ”Solicitor
Joseph is a Third 6 pupil who specialises in civil work. He has a particular interest in property litigation and has gained experience in all types of property cases during pupillage including possession cases (for landlords, including social landlords, and tenants); forfeiture 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. Joseph has experience of prosecutions under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and is keen to build his experience in regulatory cases relating to property.
Before pupillage, Joseph appeared in over 500 cases as a solicitor’s agent in the County Court. Joseph’s experience ranges from managing busy possession lists to whole-day trials. He has appeared in substantive trials as well as many applications for summary judgments, strike-outs, and set-asides. He has acted in injunction applications on very short notice and is good at quickly assimilating the facts and law in any given case.
Joseph acts in property matters for landlords and tenants. He has significant experience of possession proceedings, including those for public sector landlords. He has acted in cases involving loss of security of tenure, tenancy fraud, and serious anti-social behaviour, as well as rent possessions and s21 notices. He has acted in forfeiture proceedings for long leases.
Joseph has obtained injunctions for access and restraining anti-social behaviour. He has also enforced these through applications for contempt and urgent hearings under Part 65.
Joseph accepts instructions across commercial law. He has appeared in small claims and summary judgments for a variety of debt and negligence claims. He is experienced in arguing about the interpretation of contracts.
Joseph has appeared in the County Courts and the Insolvency and Companies Court in insolvency matters. He accepts instructions in personal and corporate insolvency.
Joseph has experience of prosecutions under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. In addition to dealing with the facts of each case, he has experience of arguing on the jurisdiction of the court under s82(6) and on the recoverable costs under s82(12).
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
- Associate Member of the Property 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
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 advised on counter-claiming for an unprotected deposit for a tenancy from early 2007 which subsequently settled.
S v W: Joseph successfully defended a claim stemming from a failure to provide services during the first national lockdown. Joseph demonstrated that frustration could not apply and the terms of the contract had not been breached.
O v B: a 1-day trial in the County Court on 42 counts of contempt for breach of an anti-social behaviour injunction.
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 no costs had been incurred.
S v R: Joseph successfully secured an anti-social behaviour injunction at a 1-day return date where the defence involved counter-allegations of anti-social behaviour against the Defendant by other tenants.
T v B: Joseph successfully defeated public law challenges to a possession claim after the death of a tenant. Allegations of succession policies being breached and the claim being disproportionate were defeated in the first hearing.