Category: Litigation & Disputes

We successfully defended a claim in the High Court when a family member challenged the fact that no provision had been made for him a Will. Had the claim succeeded then the executor and sole beneficiary of the Will would have had to sell property in order to pay any award made by the Court.

Wills and Probate disputes can be very complex and require expert legal guidance to resolve matters as fairly as possible.

At Wrigley Claydon, we fight on your behalf to make this difficult time a little easier, whether you are bringing a claim or you are on the receiving end. We are experienced in this field and have won complex cases for our clients.

As it is an emotional time we deal with our cases sensitively.

If you are looking for dispute advice then please contact us. Call 0161 785 3534 to speak to to Shalish Mehta, in our civil and commercial litigation department or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com.

A couple in Market Weighton have spent tens of thousands of pounds in a row with neighbours over a hedge say they’re prepared to go to jail to prove it belongs to them.

In 2012 when Steve and Sandra Marshall discovered a hole had been cut from the middle of the bushes.

Their next-door neighbours say that they own the shrub – which sits between the two properties and that they should be allowed to trim it.

The Marshalls insist the shrub is theirs and state that they have accumulated £56,000 of unpaid fees on top of the £15,000 they have already paid.

Judges have already ruled that the hedge lies on the neighbours’ side of the boundary. The Marshalls have been told they cannot cut the bush and must let someone onto their property to trim it instead.

However, the Marshalls have refused permission onto their land. They are now risking a fine or a prison sentence after they turned surveyors away, as they are now in breach of an injunction.

Churchill Insurance, who are the next door neighbours’ insurers, and who will have been funding the neighbours’ claim, has declined to comment.

If you find yourself in a civil litigation neighbour dispute or indeed you have been served with an injunction for whatever reason then we suggest you speak to Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com. He can advise you on the appropriate course of action and assist with any legal documents or proceedings that may occur.

If you knew there had been a previous civil litigation neighbour dispute would that put you off buying a house?

Producers of The Great British Bake Off reportedly engaged lawyers and threatened to sue the BBC.

It has been reported that the BBC was involved in a dispute with Love Productions back in 2014 over a hairdressing competition called Hair, which originally been shown on BBC3.

Produced by the BBC, Hair documented the quest to find the country’s best amateur hair stylist through a series of hairdressing challenges, similar to the challenges on Bake Off.

Love Productions argued that Hair effectively “ripped-off” the Bake Off format. Love Productions lawyer said it was the clearest cut case they’d seen of a format infringement.

The matter did not reach the court however; the dispute may have caused a breakdown in relationships with the BBC resulting in the sale of the show to Channel 4.

If you have a brand, something you have invented, or an original piece of work that you have written and someone infringes your rights we can help. We can assist you in securing an injunction and/or damages or account of profits and the delivery up and destruction of the offending item. If you have been accused of infringing someone’s intellectual property rights then we can also help by raising various defences and minimizing your liability.

If you feel you have an intellectual property case and need some legal advice then please speak to Shalish Mehta, our civil and commercial litigation solicitor. Please call us on 0161 785 3534 or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com.

Hundreds of thousands of VW, Audi and SEAT owners are set to use new ‘class action’ rights which comes into force on 29 September 2016 pursuant to under the Consumer Rights Act, to sue Volkswagen for fixing the exhaust gas checks on its diesel cars to make them appear more green.

VW has put aside £5billion to cope with the recall crisis however the final bill could force it into bankruptcy.

Steve Fowler, editor-in chief of Auto Express, said: ‘If Volkswagen are cheating in one emissions test, how many more have they been cheating on? This could be just the tip of the iceberg. If one manufacturer is cheating, what about the others? The silence has been deafening. You would expect other car makers to be making hay at the expense of a rival but they are not. The industry should be shouting from the roof tops that they are clean. They should come out quickly and say they are not cheating.’

Under the Consumer Rights Act you have an early right to reject goods that are unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described and get a full refund. We can help you obtain the result that you deserve.

If you feel you have consumer issue and need some legal advice then please speak to Shalish Mehta, our civil and commercial litigation solicitor. Please call us on 0161 785 3534 or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com.

Did you purchase a vehicle based on its emissions? Or are emissions ratings irrelevant when you are considering the choice of a car?

Players of the recent phenomenon Pokémon Go should be careful, in case they find themselves facing court proceedings for trespass on private land.

If there is a real and apparent risk that the gathering of Pokémon hunters could cause injury to property or people, there is a case law that suggests a landowner can obtain an injunction against ‘Persons Unknown’ prohibiting them from causing the threatened nuisance or trespass.

It is unlikely that Nintendo, as the producer of ‘Pokémon Go’ would be liable since it does not encourage trespassing and a disclaimer appears on screen at the start of the game. However, a man in the US said strangers started lingering outside of his home with at least five people knocking on his door and has commenced a lawsuit.

While the occasional misguided trespass is unlikely to result in court proceedings, repeat offenders may find themselves facing an injunction.

If you find that your property has been subject to trespass or any nuisance or indeed you have been served with an injunction for whatever reason then we suggest you speak to Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department. He can advise you on the appropriate course of action and assist with any legal documents or proceedings that may occur.

Please call our harassment and trespass solicitors on 0161 785 3534 or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com

A daughter who was left nothing in her late father’s £1million will is battling her stepmother over the fortune.

Danielle Ames told the Court she ‘idolised’ her father, Michael Ames, that he was her ‘best friend’ and that he ‘doted’ on her as his only child. However, she was shocked when her father, who ran a glazing business, died in 2013 and left his entire fortune to Danielle’s step-mother, Elaine Ames.

The daughter is now trying to convince a Judge that she is due £300,000 as ‘reasonable provision’ from her father’s estate.

However, her stepmother is arguing that her late husband deliberately cut his daughter out, as he had a strong work ethic and believed grown-up children should ‘look after themselves.’ She told the Judge that he had given the daughter financial support to set up her own picture framing business and therefore the will makes reasonable financial provision for all parties.

The daughter and her family currently have a monthly deficit of over £2,000 and she is struggling to make ends meet. She also has debts of £10,000.

However, the stepmother said that Ms Ames is a grown up, ‘fit and able to work’ and ought to stand on her own two feet.

She told the Judge that her husband had promised her that his money would be used to look after her in her old age. She detailed a ‘list of ailments’ she is afflicted with.

The bulk of Mr Ames’ assets are tied up in the four-bedroom £650,000 family home in Hoddesdon, where Mrs Ames still lives. She says she would be forced to sell the home she has lived in for 13 years, if ordered to satisfy Ms Ames’ claim.

Urging both women to put their animosity aside, Judge Halpern told them their personal feelings about each other were of little relevance to the case.

As at September 2016, the hearing continues.

Disputes can be very complex and require expert legal guidance to resolve matters as fairly as possible. At Wrigley Claydon, we fight on your behalf to make this difficult time a little easier, whether you are bringing a claim or you are on the receiving end. We are experienced in this field and have won complex cases for our clients. As it is an emotional time we deal with our cases sensitively ensuring that all of our clients are happy with each stage of the process and the outcome of proceedings.

If you are looking for will dispute advice do not hesitate to contact us. Call 0161 624 6811 to speak to to Shalish Mehta, in our civil and commercial litigation department or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com.

A millionaire businessman has been ordered to chop down 80ft trees in the grounds of his mansion after a neighbour dispute that they blocked out sunlight and could crush their homes.

James Turnbull’s £1.4million estate borders a row of gardens in the upmarket village of Bridge of Weir, Renfrewshire. Neighbours claimed the trees were ruining their properties and stopping sunlight from getting into their homes.

One neighbour claimed he slept in his living room in case trees collapsed and fell into his bedroom and also stated that he was forced to switch on lights during the day due to trees blocking the natural light.

He took his complaint to the Scottish Government after Renfrewshire Council rejected his earlier application to have the trees cut down on the basis that ‘significant gaps’ within the hedge allowed sunlight to pass through and dismissed a bid to have them cut down.

However, Government reporter Robert Seaton has now ruled the trees should be chopped by October. He stated, “The removal of these trees should be sufficient to address the matters of sunlight and daylight to the appellants’ properties and their gardens as well as the issues of the dominance of hedge and needle fall.”

Although the above is a Scottish case there are many courses of action you can take when dealing with a neighbour dispute in order to maintain cordial relations.

Speak to Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com. He can advise you on the appropriate course of action and assist with any legal documents or proceedings that may occur.

A QC is facing a bill of hundreds of thousands of pounds after he lost a six-year court battle over the purchase of a £3.6 million 30 room 18th century manor.

William Griffiths QC fought against Alan Hardy in a bid to avoid having to pay him for pulling out of a deal to buy Laughton Manor in Sussex, which was overhauled by a friend of Queen Victoria.

The purchase was cancelled after Mr Griffiths discovered damp, rot and timber decay but a court ruled that Mr Griffiths had broken his contract with Mr Hardy and after losing an appeal Mr Griffiths must pay Mr Hardy £385,000 in compensation and costs.

Mr Griffiths withdrew from the deal and refused to pay the £210,000 owed as part of a 10 percent deposit.

Mr Hardy in turn said he would not refund the £150,000 which had already paid.

In 2014, the Court ruled that Mr Griffiths had no right to pull out of the deal and ordered him to pay £235,000 damages for breach of contract, in addition to the £150,000.

In April 2016 the Court of Appeal, sided with Mr Hardy, ruling that Mr Griffiths had no prospect of success in overturning the previous High Court decision.

Mr Griffiths claimed that Mr Hardy had misled him about the condition of property during the sale.

However, the Court of Appeal accepted Mr Hardy’s evidence that he had never had the house surveyed and was unaware of any damp problem and found that Mr Hardy had an ‘unconditional right’ to cancel the contract when Mr Griffiths failed to pay the balance of the deposit or complete on time.

If you wish to make a claim for breach of contract, or indeed are facing a breach of contract claim then call our breach of contract solicitors on 0161 785 3534 and speak to Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department or email shalish.mehta@wrigleyclaydon.com.