Home > Our people > Barristers > Faisel Sadiq
Faisel Sadiq
  • We take data and privacy issues very seriously. See our privacy policy.
  • This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Always my first port of call for land, property or trust litigation


Easy to reach, easy to speak to and always delivers advice quickly and thoroughly.


His ability to identify the issues and resolve them quickly, commercially and hugely competently is greatly appreciated by us and our lay clients in equal measure.


He can be relied upon for commercial landlord and tenant disputes.

Legal 500

Faisel’s practice focuses on property and Chancery litigation. In particular:

  • All aspects of landlord and tenant work, both commercial and residential.
  • Mortgages – including enforceability, subrogation and marshalling.
  • Real property – including easements, restrictive covenants and overage agreements.
  • Co-ownership disputes
  • Trusts of land disputes – with particular experience of Quistclose and Pallant v Morgan trusts
  • Non-domestic rates
  • HMO licensing and rent repayment orders
  • Professional negligence claims against property professionals
  • Planning enforcement

He has extensive experience of mediations and has appeared in the Beth Din of the Federation of Synagogues.

Earlier in his career, he spent several years in the Government Legal Service where, amongst other things, he worked advised the Housing Corporation on the regulation of housing associations and worked on the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 and the Housing Act 2004.

In his spare time, he regularly attends both the theatre and comedy clubs. He practises yoga and enjoys travelling.

Commercial Landlord & Tenant

Faisel handles all aspects of commercial Landlord & Tenant law including break clauses, dilapidations, assignment, 1954 Act renewals, forfeiture and enforcement of covenants.

Recent work:

  • Arqiva Limited v Mendey – acting for a landlord seeking to resist the grant of a new lease to an electronic communications company pursuant to Part II of the 1954 Act.
  • Muswell Hill Limited v Chapple & Yankin – dispute between sub-lessees and freeholder as to the scope of works to be carried out by the freeholder to the block pursuant to a deed of variation by which the freeholder was able to redevelop the block.
  • Sheffield City Council v Katsura Holdings Inc – case concerning whether a lease of part of an office building in Sheffield was a sham / otherwise invalid for failure to comply with the formalities to create a lease, such as to leave the liability for business rates with the freeholder.
  • Southwark v Royce & Nicoue [2019] UKUT 331 (LC) – Case concerning whether a landlord’s ability to recover service charges for incidental costs could extend to works on a neighbouring estate
  • Ludgate House Ltd v (1) Ricketts (2) Southwark LBC [2019] UKUT 278 (LC); [2019] RA 423: Dispute concerning large Central London office block.  The landlord granted property guardian contractual licences to secure it against squatter and are seeking to avoid liability for business rates. Appeal to be heard by the Court of Appeal in November 2021
  • Pembury Hotels Limited v Spyrou (2018) – dispute over whether a lease and guarantees for a hotel was a sham.
  • Pembury Estates Ltd v Panzer Properties – acting for a guarantor in seeking to resist a claim for unpaid rent under a lease of a hotel.

Housing (Social & Privately Rented)

Faisel started his practice at a leading landlord and tenant having worked on residential landlord and tenant legislation whilst a government lawyer. Faisel has extensive experience of possession proceedings (including those raising issues of anti-social behaviour / nuisance), injunctions to restrain anti-social behaviour and disrepair. In recent years he has developed a specialism in dealing with breaches of the HMO licensing legislation and rent repayment orders.  

  • Sato v Bibi and Prime Land Property Limited (2020) – case concerning the identity of who the landlord is for the purposes of making a rent repayment order.
  • Camden LBC v Olivers Town (2018) – representing a lettings agent in a prosecution for breach of the HMO licensing regulations.
  • Barnet LBC v Shelemey (2017) – successfully representing a landlord at his trial for alleged breach of the HMO licensing regulations.
  • Walthamstow LBC v Husbands – representing a defendant at the Crown Court at a trial for failure to have an HMO licence.

Leasehold & Leasehold Management

Faisel regularly handles disputes relating to long leases including service charge issues, forfeiture and breach of covenant.

Recent work:

  • Southwark LBC v Royce & Nicoue [2019] UKUT 331 (LC): construction of service charge provisions in residential leases where the leases were granted to the lessees pursuant to the right to buy.
  • Golding v Martin [2019] EWCA Civ 446; [2019] 3 W.L.R. 138 – leading case in which Faisel succeeded in persuading the Court of Appeal to rule against a first instance decision that the ability to obtain relief from forfeiture pursuant to s.138(2) and (3), County Courts Act 1984, could not amount to success for the purposes of CPR 39.3(5).
  • Sheffield City Council v Katsura Holdings: whether an equitable lease gives the lessee the right of possession sufficient to render the lessee liable for business rates.
  • Lindsay v (1) Berkeley Homes, (2) Southwark LBC – successfully representing in the High Court (TCC) a local housing authority in resisting an application by a long-lessee for an injunction to prevent it carrying out works to its block.
  • Southwark LBC v Akhtar Upper Tribunal [2017] UKUT 150 (LC) – (led by Philip Rainey QC) representing the landlord in an appeal considering the enforceability of service charge covenants and the mechanics of recovery.
  • Peabody Estates v 28 Leaseholders – representing leaseholders in resisting their liability to pay service charges on the basis that the works did not come within the service charge covenants.
  • Southwark LBC v Cagacar – representing landowner seeking to recover service charges owed pursuant to a freehold covenant under the “benefit and burden” principle.

Real Property & Mortgages

Faisel handles a wide variety of real property and mortgage related work including options, covenants, easements, property damage/nuisance and charges relating to the beneficial ownership of land.

Recent work:

  • Advising over of a large plot of land (including a disused pub) over the enforceability of restrictive covenants that were preventing redevelopment.
  • Advising on the enforceability of restrictive covenants that (if enforceable) might prevent the development of a large residential development.
  • Advising on whether and the extent to which the terms of a lease (e.g. covenant of quiet enjoyment) would preclude the freeholder carrying out extensive development of a commercial site.
  • Advising on scope of easement that provides entry to a retail park.
  • Central Bridging Loans Limited v Covell – representing a borrower resisting an order for sale of high value residential property sought by bridging lender.
  • De Muller v Harrison-Morgan [2019] EWCA 2094: a proprietary claim to recover £2.2 million paid over as part of the sale of a property in Belgravia.
  • Pourghazi v Kamyab – advised and represented a lender in a marshalling claim in respect of a large mortgage portfolio in the Chancery Division.
  • Commercial First v Riggs – acting in a claim to rescind a mortgage due to the lender paying an undisclosed commission to the borrower’s mortgage broker.
  • Altay Ali v Commercial First– resisting the making of an order for sale on the grounds that the relationship giving rise to the underlying debt was unfair for the purposes of s.140A to 140C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
  • Nadeau v Robins – boundary dispute involving consideration of the effect of notices under the Party Walls Etc. Act 1996.
  • Brophy v Maguire – representing defendant in nuisance claim arising from damage caused by tree roots.
  • Southern Water v East Sussex CC – representing a water company in a claim for negligence / nuisance against a highway authority that damaged a sewer when carrying out works to the highway.
  • Livingstone v Ball– representing a defendant in a claim considering the construction and scope of an easement.
  • Matthews v Bassi – represented the claimants in a boundary dispute involving consideration of the Party Walls Etc Act 1996.
  • Palmer v Hickmott & Hargreaves acted for the claimant in trial for breach of statutory duty arising from a failure to follow the Party Wall, Etc Act 1996.

Development & Planning

Faisel’s regularly advises on planning enforcement, TPOs, failure to comply with the requirements of the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010 and breaches of HMO licensing requirements (which includes appearing in the Crown and Magistrates’ Courts). He has advised public utilities (water companies) on potential public law challenges by their regulators.

Recent work:

  • Advising on the enforceability of an option agreement for a property developer.
  • Advising and representing a property developer in mediation over the value of monies to be paid under an overage agreement.
  • Barnet LBC v Netzach Israel Limited– representing a company at trial and subsequent sentencing and confiscation hearing for breach of a planning enforcement notice.
  • Camden LBC v Bucknell – representing a councillor being prosecuted by his own authority for breach of a planning enforcement notice.
  • Reading BC v Akhtar – representing three defendants at the Magistrates Court on trial for breach of the Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013.
  • Hackney LBC v Braun – representing the defendants in proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court for breach of an enforcement notice.
  • Hackney LBC v Homeglade – representing the defendants in proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court for breach of an improvement notice.
  • Crest Nicholson Operations Ltd v Runnymede BC – acting for a local authority in a trial of a statutory appeal against noise abatement notice involving noise emanating from the Longcross Test Track.

Trusts of Land

Faisel has a particular interest in TOLATA claims, handling cases such as:

  • Advising and representing family members in a family dispute over ownership of agricultural land and a commercial retail park worth in excess of £10 million. Raises issues of beneficial ownership and proprietary estoppel.
  • De Muller v Harrison-Morgan [2019] EWCA 2094; [2018] EWHC 1904:  a proprietary claim to recover £2.2 million paid in breach of trust as part of the sale of a property in Belgravia.
  • Acting for a businessman and company director in an arbitration in the Federation Beth Din in a dispute over beneficial ownership of a property portfolio.
  • Covell v Gobbee – dispute between co-owners of land over whether land should be sold and their respective entitlement to the sale proceeds.
  • Dudley v Pluck – acting for the executors of an estate resisting a declaration that an occupant of a high value residential dwelling had a beneficial interest in the property.
  • Represented one of two Indian businessmen over beneficial ownership of their property portfolio in the Midlands.

Commercial Litigation

Faisel handles a wide variety of general contractual disputes including emergency procedure applications such as freezing injunctions.  He has a particular interest in cases concerning directors’ fiduciary duties and personal liability and his property expertise gives him an advantage in handling high value disputes involving significant property issues.  He also deals with cases involving illegality, actions against receivers and actions against fiduciaries/agents including consideration of Quistclose trusts.

Recent work:

  •  Al Darwish v LGC Global Limited – acted of a company resisting an application for a freezing order arising from a dispute over the purchase of luxury goods.
  • Herskovic v Herskovic – acting for a businessman and company director in resisting an application for a freezing injunction in the High Court and subsequently in the Beth Din.
  • Re Lynx Management Limited –acted for a company director in a substantial claim for breach of duty.
  • Robatoo Ltd v Gordeno – a case involving an application for a freezing order in the High Court.
  • Npower v Upark– acting for a company in resisting a claim to recover charges for the supply of electricity under a deemed contract pursuant to Sch.6 of the Electricity Act 1989.
  • Patel v Mirza [2014] EWCA Civ 1047– represented the defendant both at trial and in the Court of Appeal in seeking to avoid having to repay monies advanced to be used for insider trading on the grounds that the defence of illegality precluded the enforcement of the underlying resulting (Quistclose) trust.
  • Atkins v Commercial First Business Limited – acted for the appellant in an appeal and mediation raising issues of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty by a mortgage broker and relief under ss.140A and 140B of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Property & Construction Professionals

Faisel’s property expertise makes him an excellent choice for disputes involving professional negligence claims against property professionals.

Recent work

  • Acting for a property developer in a multi-million pound claim against a firm of architects and structural engineers for negligent advice that caused significant delay to completion of a large redevelopment project near Bedford.
  • Southern Water Services Limited v East Sussex CC & Kier Group Plc – acting for water company in negligence / nuisance claim (damages of approx. £1 million sought) against local highways authority and its contractors for negligently damaging sewers as part of construction of the highway

Directory recommendations

Faisel is recommended for property litigation in Legal 500: “Can be relied upon for commercial landlord and tenant disputes.”

Professional Associations

Chancery Bar Association
Property Bar Association
Professional Negligence Bar Association
South Eastern Circuit
Association of Women Barristers


Annotations to Part VII of the Localism Act 2011, Current Law Statutes
Annotations to Part II of the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008, Current Law Statutes


BVC, Inns of Court School of Law, City University
LLM, University College, University of London
LLB (Hons), Queen Mary College, University of London


Chambers & Partners Award 2019 – Outstanding Contribution to Diversity & Inclusion
Major Scholar, Inner Temple
Duke of Edinburgh Entrance Award


Joint Vice-Chair, Bar Council’s Equality, Diversity and Social Mobility Committee – December 2019 to Present
Chair, Bar Council’s Disability Panel – January 2019 to Present.
Member, Inner Temple Equality, Diversity and Inclusivity Committee – January 2019 to Present.
Member, Inner Temple Education and Training Committee – January 2019 to Present.
Member, Panel of Experts on Pre-application Judicial Education (Ministry of Justice, Bar Council, Law Society and CILEx)– October 2018 to Present
Bencher, Inner Temple – July 2018 – to Present.
Member, Inner Temple Scholarships Committee – February 2012 to Present.
Member, Bar Council’s Equality and Diversity Committee – March 2012 to December 2019
Member, Bar Council’s Disability Panel – March 2012 to January 2019.
Member, Inner Temple Bar Liaison Committee – December 2011 to December 2014
Assistant Editor, Housing Law Reports – 2009 to 2012
Advocacy Trainer, Inner Temple – 2009 to Present
Editor, Housing Ombudsman Bulletin, News on the Block – 2006 to 2007

Recent articles

  • Case Analysis – Who is liable for non-domestic rates when occupation of a hereditament is shared? (Atos IT Services Ltd v Fylde Borough Council), Lexis PSL, 03.04.20
  • Case Analysis – Hughes (Valuation Officer) v Exeter CC [2020] UKUT 7 (LC), LexisNexis, 31.01.20
  • Property guardians effective for avoiding business rates liability on empty office, Lexis PSL, 24.10.19
  • When orders for forfeiture can be set aside (Golding v Martin), Lexis PSL 11.04.19
  • Disability at the Bar, Counsel 2019, Sep, 19-21
  • Irreconcilable differences?, New Law Journal, N.L.J. 2014, 164 (7622), 15-16
  • A landlord’s liability for the acts of its tenants: back to where we started – X v Hounslow LBC revisited, Journal of Housing Law (2009) Vol.12 No.5 Pages 86-87
  • A landlord’s liability for the acts of its tenants: Mitchell v Glasgow City Council revisited, Journal of Housing Law J.H.L. (2009) Vol.12 No.3 Pages 48-53
  • A landlord’s liability for the acts of its tenants: X v Hounslow LBC & Mitchell v Glasgow City Council, Journal of Housing Law J.H.L. (2009) Vol.12 No.1 Pages 9-14


Faisel is committed to encouraging both those considering legal careers and greater diversity within the Bar and the legal professional generally.  For example, he:

  • Mentors BPTC students for the Inner Temple
  • Interviews students applying for scholarships for the Inner Temple
  • Interviews students applying for disability awards for the Inner Temple
  • Speaks on disability and the Bar at various events for the Bar Council