A nightmare scenario many landlords fear is squatters breaking into their commercial premises, settling, and refusing to vacate without a court order.
Muitos ocupantes sabem muitas vezes o que estão a fazer e conhecem os seus direitos. Os senhorios podem constatar que os invasores afixaram uma espécie de aviso na porta que diz‘ESTE É UM EDIFÍCIO NÃO RESIDENCIAL - A Secção 144 da LAPSO NÃO se aplica’ – and they’d be right.
Quais são as opções dos senhorios?
The first port of call for most landlords is, naturally, to call the police. However, most find that the police vontade not get involved unless what’s known as an ‘interim possession order’ (“IPO”) has been obtained from the court. An IPO carries a penal notice that allows the police to remove the squatters if they have not vacated the propriedade within 24 hours of the order having been made and served on the squatters. The Squatters could therefore be arrested and face criminal punishment such as fines, or even imprisonment, if they do not vacate.
So, a landlord can either initiate possession proceedings against trespassers in the ‘standard’ fashion, or, if they meet the criteria, seek an IPO. If they seek an IPO, they must act fast as the application must be made within 28 days of knowledge of the squatting.
O teste jurídico
Um IPO só pode ser concedido se:
(1) the claimant is only seeking possession. A claimant cannot seek an IPO if there is a claim for another remedy (e.g. damages); and
(2) o requerente tem um direito imediato à posse e teve esse direito durante todo o período de ocupação ilegal; e
(3) the defendants entered the premises as trespassers.
A common misconception is that the legal test for imóveis comerciais owners obtaining an IPO is the same as obtaining a standard possession order against trespassers – after all, a squatter is a trespasser, and to obtain an IPO, the individuals in question have to have entered the property as trespassers (as above).
No entanto, não é esse o caso. Para obter uma ordem de posse normal contra invasores (que não implica as mesmas sanções penais em caso de incumprimento), o senhorio só precisa de ter um direito de posse (não um direito imediato). Não é este o caso para obter um IPO.
Direito imediato à posse e potenciais problemas
An immediate right to possession means one can claim a full right to possession and there are no superseding legal interests that stand in their way.
Lacunas no registo
A quite foreseeable issue that a landlord might face is, they purchase a property, and immediately undertake strip out and refit works before re-letting. Vacant comercial properties subject to strip out works, that look like building sites and are not fully secured, are prime targets for squatters.
The issue a landlord might face is that it can take many, many months for HMLR to complete the application to register the landlords proprietorship. During this period, known as a registration gap, the landlord is the beneficial owner of the property and do not hold an immediate right to possession, until the registration is completed (and the registration gap ends) at which point they become the legal registered owner.
Neste caso, é provável que o tribunal queira ver o registo concluído, por isso é fundamental que os Requerentes acelerem qualquer pedido de registo e estejam prontos para apresentar cópias actualizadas do HMLR pelo menos no dia da audiência. Se não o fizerem, arriscam-se a que o juiz considere que o proprietário registado é a única parte com direito à posse imediata e a ação pode falhar.
Alugueres
What often precedes vacant possession is the surrender of a Lease. Similarly with registration gaps, it can take HMLR many months to complete an application to remove the Lease from the register. In this instance, the court may consider the Landlord does not have the right to immediate possession and in fact it is the Lessee with this right. Again, it is vital the Landlord expedites any application to remove the Lease from the title or risk the judge taking this view.
Conclusão
IPO’s are brilliant tools for removing squatters quickly, however Landlords need to act fast and ensure they hit the procedural requirements. The penal notice IPO’s carry mean judges can often take an even more cautious approach to that of standard possession claims, so Landlords need to make sure everything is in place, and they are satisfied of their immediate right to possession.
Further, the IPO is only (by name) an interim order, and the possession order is not made final until the return date. As part of the prescribed form of application and witness statement, Landlords will give a number of undertakings – another distinct difference from the standard possession route – of which includes undertakings not to re-let or damage the property until the possession claim has been decided. Landlords therefore need to ensure they are not breaching any of the undertakings they have given in this interim period, and it is advisable they see the process through to a final order to avoid doubt, even in the event the squatters vacate following the IPO.
For any further information, or if you are a landlord who finds themselves in a situation where squatters have settled in your property, please reach out to the team: Harry Medway at h.medway@rfblegal.co.uk, Rudi Ramdarshan em r.ramdarshan@rfblegal.co.uk, Ben Frost em b.frost@rfblegal.co.uk ou Victoria Huxley em v.huxley@rfblegal.co.uk.
Escrito por Harry Medway.
Harry Medway
Solicitador associado
