On the Case: EMA Brexit dispute analysed by the QCs who fought the case
Two of the leading barristers in property law, Joanne Wicks QC and Jonathan Seitler QC (both of Wilberforce Chambers), discuss the recent high-profile case in which they went head-to-head – Canary Wharf (BP4) T1 Ltd v European Medicines Agency [2019] EWHC 335 Ch; [2019] PLSCS 37.
Earlier this year, the High Court ruled in favour of landlord Canary Wharf that Brexit will not “frustrate” the EMA’s £13m-a-year lease of extensive premises at Canary Wharf, which runs until 2039 with no break clause.
Two of the leading barristers in property law, Joanne Wicks QC and Jonathan Seitler QC (both of Wilberforce Chambers), discuss the recent high-profile case in which they went head-to-head – Canary Wharf (BP4) T1 Ltd v European Medicines Agency [2019] EWHC 335 Ch; [2019] PLSCS 37.
Earlier this year, the High Court ruled in favour of landlord Canary Wharf that Brexit will not “frustrate” the EMA’s £13m-a-year lease of extensive premises at Canary Wharf, which runs until 2039 with no break clause.
With permission granted for a possible appeal by the EMA, Wicks (who acted for Canary Wharf) and Seitler (who represented the EMA) discuss the issues raised by the case, the arguments advanced by themselves and their teams, and the details of the judge’s decision.
In addition, they share their contrasting thoughts on the industry reaction to the dispute, and its possible implications for property.
To send feedback, e-mail jess.harrold@egi.co.uk or tweet @estatesgazette
