Originally from Essex, Rob moved to Yorkshire to study at the University of Hull and has lived here ever since. He joined us as a Trainee Solicitor in 1992 straight from Law College and left in 2000 to join Lupton Fawcett in Leeds. Rob returned to Gosschalks as a Partner in the Litigation department in 2001.
A Property Litigator with over 20 years’ experience in his current role, Rob specialises in landlord and tenant law for the leisure sector, with particular experience of tied pub leases.
“People usually start shouting when they realise they don’t have a good argument. Calm and clear is almost always best.”
Rob has had various articles and letters published in leading property journals, including Estates Gazette, Commercial Leases and The Morning Advertiser.
He’s known for his excellent communication skills, extensive legal knowledge and friendly approach. When asked what he most enjoys about his job, Rob told us it was the excitement of winning cases and leading his team.
“When I see one of my team doing something truly excellent, it fills me with pride.”
- Representative on the Northern Committee of the Property Litigation Association
- Accredited mediator
Rob's most noted cases include:
- New Inn Public House Walton Ltd v Ei Group Plc – PCA’s website Quarter_1_2019_11 – Failure of service of MRO notice.
- Food Drink Rooms Ltd v Ei Group Plc and Unique Pub Properties Ltd – PCA’s website Quarter 2_2019_9 – Form of MRO tenancy (DOV or new lease).
- EI Group Plc v In & Out Developments Ltd, John Joseph Burke, and Barrington Burke (A Bankrupt)  EWHC 1887 (QB) – Forfeiture – tenant’s failure to comply with terms of a consent order for relief.
- Unique Pub Properties v Roddy (UK),  EWCH 4019 (Ch)) – application for an injunction in the face of a Competition Act defence.
- Hankins & Hankins v Ei Group plc- 2018 PCA’s website Quarter 3_1 - What constitutes a rent review for the purposes of r.19(2) of the Pubs Code etc Regulations 2016.
- Clarke & Minett v Ei Group plc – 2018 PCA’s website Quarter 3_2 – Considerations affecting whether an MRO tenancy has to be by new lease or by DOV.
- Wellington - Red Lion, Isleworth - Morning Advertiser 11 September 2015 - Successful challenge to ACV listing
- Enterprise Inns Plc –v- Turk  – Landlord & Tenant Act 1954 – Opposition to renewal of a lease of a pub under grounds (a), (b) and (c) of Section 30(1) of the Act.
- Enterprise Inns Plc v Rosetta Road Ltd (2013) (The Alma, Islington) Morning Advertiser - Tenant's right to set off against rent.
- Unique Pub Properties Limited –v- Fitzpatrick  Committal for contempt of Court following breach of an undertaking to comply with the terms of the tie.
- Unique Pub Properties Ltd v Broad Green Tavern Ltd and another  All ER (D) 352 (Jul) - Landlord's right to install flow monitors in a public house
- Enterprise Inns Plc v Palmerston Associates Ltd and others  All ER (D) 90 (Dec) - Interpretation of the beer tie - tie by brand vs tie by type
- Unique Pub Properties -v- Onifas Limited; ChD 2011 - Implied terms and a landlord's right to install flow monitors in a public house.
- WH Brakspear & Sons v Bateman - Morning Advertiser 22/3/11 - Competition issues/ eviction.
- Enterprise Inns Plc v Forest Hill Tavern Ltd  All ER (D) 204 - Defeating tenant’s challenge to the enforceability of the tie.
- Rouf v Tragus Holdings Ltd Chancery Division, 13 January 2009 Forfeiture; Injunctions; Disclaimer; Peaceful enjoyment of possessions; Periodic tenancies; Rent arrears; Rights of re-entry; Underleases  EWHC 96 (Ch);
- Campbell-Bell v Enterprise Inns plc (QB)  All ER (D) 50 - a rent review challenge concerning the arbitrator's choice of the top downwards valuation method inpreference to the bottom upwards valuation approach.
- Brooker v Unique Pub Properties Ltd (2009) 49 EG 72 - Valuation of rent on LTA 1954 - renewal of a public house.
- Wellington Pub Co. PLC v Hancock Estates Gazette 12/5/2009 - Pursuing guarantors abroad.
- O’Donoghue –v- Enterprise Inns Plc  EWHC B15(CH) – dismissal of an application for permission to appeal an arbitration award on the grounds that the Arbitrator had adopted the wrong procedure.