Your lawyers since 1722

Andrew Hindle

Boodle Hatfield Portraits 2012

Senior Associate
Litigation

+44 (0) 20 7079 8229 download vcard
Boodle Hatfield Portraits 2012

Described in one legal guide as bringing "light, rather than heat, to situations", Andrew specialises in helping clients resolve property disputes of all kinds.

His practice covers the High Court and County Court, statutory tribunals and alternative dispute resolution, including mediation and arbitration. He acts for owners, landlords, tenants, occupiers and developers of all types of commercial, residential and agricultural property.

Andrew’s extensive experience includes breach of covenant, rent recovery, dilapidations, neighbour disputes and disputes with an insolvency aspect. He handles contested business lease renewals and rent reviews for both landlords and tenants, and has in-depth experience of residential property disputes involving the Rent Acts, the Housing Act and the Leasehold Reform Acts.

He also advises landlords and tenants of agricultural holdings and farm business tenancies.

Track Record

Representing the landlord in a contentious (albeit unopposed) business lease renewal claim which went to trial under the First­-tier Tribunal’s Pilot Scheme for Unopposed Business Lease Renewals. Although the sole issue in dispute was rent, the case raised numerous interesting issues relating both to the court’s jurisdiction and procedure, and to the weight to be given to non-expert opinion evidence put forward by the tenant’s director. Judgment was given for the rental figure put forward by the client’s expert after the court rejected the tenant’s “expert” evidence in its entirety

Acting for a renowned dress designer whose landlord took advantage of a misunderstanding to take possession of her studios. The landlord’s real motive appeared to be to force the tenant to take a new lease at a significantly higher rent. The landlord aggressively opposed the client’s court application in circumstances where a reasonable landlord would have agreed terms, instructing senior counsel to oppose both an application for an injunction allowing the clients to resume possession and the claim to reinstate the lease, even though the clients had been excellent tenants for very many years. The matter was vital to the clients, who were unable to access their IT and other facilities vital to the operation of their business. We were able to “short-circuit” the lengthy court process by applying for an injunction; at the hearing the whole claim was resolved and the clients let back into possession

Andrew acted for the landlords in a long-running dispute, dating from 2017, originating in the replacement of windows in two flats in a prestigious area of Central London. These and other issues led to the tenants withholding substantial amounts of rent and service charge. Shortly before proceedings were to be issued the parties agreed to refer the dispute to mediation. Although the sum in dispute had appeared to be in the region of £70,000, at mediation the tenants unexpectedly put forward a claim for £350,000. The mediation, which lasted a day, was eventually settled on the basis of a credit of approximately £50,000 and the variation of the leases, and at a fraction of the legal costs which would have been incurred in bringing court proceedings

Andrew acted for the owners of three flats who were unable to sell or re-mortgage because the landlord of the block had been dissolved under companies legislation. After proceedings in the Companies Court involving the director of the dissolved landlord the court made an order vesting the headlease of the block of flats in a company owned by the flat-owners, who were then able to take control of the block. Re Cadmus Management Ltd (in dissolution) – 2016, Companies Court.

Eaton Square Properties v Shaw – 2011, Queen’s Bench Division, 2013, Court of Appeal

Awards & Rankings

Chambers UK, Ranked Individual, 2017 – 2020

Memberships

City of Westminster and Holborn Law Society

Editorial Board Member, Landlord and Tenant Review (Sweet and Maxwell)

Education & Qualification

Trinity College Oxford

Qualified as a solicitor in 1979

Representing the landlord in a contentious (albeit unopposed) business lease renewal claim which went to trial under the First­-tier Tribunal’s Pilot Scheme for Unopposed Business Lease Renewals. Although the sole issue in dispute was rent, the case raised numerous interesting issues relating both to the court’s jurisdiction and procedure, and to the weight to be given to non-expert opinion evidence put forward by the tenant’s director. Judgment was given for the rental figure put forward by the client’s expert after the court rejected the tenant’s “expert” evidence in its entirety

Acting for a renowned dress designer whose landlord took advantage of a misunderstanding to take possession of her studios. The landlord’s real motive appeared to be to force the tenant to take a new lease at a significantly higher rent. The landlord aggressively opposed the client’s court application in circumstances where a reasonable landlord would have agreed terms, instructing senior counsel to oppose both an application for an injunction allowing the clients to resume possession and the claim to reinstate the lease, even though the clients had been excellent tenants for very many years. The matter was vital to the clients, who were unable to access their IT and other facilities vital to the operation of their business. We were able to “short-circuit” the lengthy court process by applying for an injunction; at the hearing the whole claim was resolved and the clients let back into possession

Andrew acted for the landlords in a long-running dispute, dating from 2017, originating in the replacement of windows in two flats in a prestigious area of Central London. These and other issues led to the tenants withholding substantial amounts of rent and service charge. Shortly before proceedings were to be issued the parties agreed to refer the dispute to mediation. Although the sum in dispute had appeared to be in the region of £70,000, at mediation the tenants unexpectedly put forward a claim for £350,000. The mediation, which lasted a day, was eventually settled on the basis of a credit of approximately £50,000 and the variation of the leases, and at a fraction of the legal costs which would have been incurred in bringing court proceedings

Andrew acted for the owners of three flats who were unable to sell or re-mortgage because the landlord of the block had been dissolved under companies legislation. After proceedings in the Companies Court involving the director of the dissolved landlord the court made an order vesting the headlease of the block of flats in a company owned by the flat-owners, who were then able to take control of the block. Re Cadmus Management Ltd (in dissolution) – 2016, Companies Court.

Eaton Square Properties v Shaw – 2011, Queen’s Bench Division, 2013, Court of Appeal

Chambers UK, Ranked Individual, 2017 – 2020

City of Westminster and Holborn Law Society

Editorial Board Member, Landlord and Tenant Review (Sweet and Maxwell)

Trinity College Oxford

Qualified as a solicitor in 1979