Winston Jacob

Winston specialises in property, commercial and insolvency litigation. He provides advice, drafting and advocacy to clients across these specialisms. He has appeared as sole counsel at all levels up to and including the Supreme Court. Winston is ranked as a Leading Junior in Property Litigation by the Legal 500.

Winston has developed a particular specialism in right to manage. He appeared for the successful Respondent RTM company in the Supreme Court in A1 Properties (Sunderland) Ltd v Tudor Studios RTM Co Ltd [2024] UKSC 27; [2024] 3 W.L.R. 601, an important authority on statutory interpretation and failures to comply with statutory notice procedures. In June 2025, he appeared in the Court of Appeal in Avon Freeholds Ltd v Cresta Court E RTM Co Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1016; [2025] H.L.R. 44, an important decision on what constitutes a “qualifying tenant” and the consequences of failing to serve a notice upon such a tenant. On 27 November 2025, the Supreme Court granted permission to appeal. Winston will be appearing again in the Court of Appeal for the Appellant in an appeal of the Upper Tribunal’s decision in The Courtyard RTM Co Ltd v Rockwell (FC103) Ltd [2025] UKUT 39 (LC); [2025] H.L.R. 23 in April 2026.

Please click on a specialism link below for more details of his experience in the relevant practice area.

Winston is valued by his clients for his comprehensive advice and thorough preparation for court appearances. He has provided insolvency training to internal lawyers at the Bar Standards Board. He has provided lectures on various topics to solicitors, corporate lay clients and the judiciary. He edits the Tenant arrears and bankruptcy section of the RICS isurv website.

Winston accepts direct instructions on a public access basis.

He was appointed a Deputy District Judge on the South Eastern Circuit in May 2020.

His reported cases include:

Avon Freeholds Ltd v Cresta Court E RTM Co Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1016; [2025] H.L.R. 44: representing the Respondent. The Court of Appeal held that an equitable tenant can be a qualifying tenant under s. 75(2) of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. Further, a RTM company’s failure to serve a notice of invitation to participate on a qualifying tenant invalidates its right to manage claim. On 27 November 2025, the Supreme Court granted the Respondent permission to appeal.
The Courtyard RTM Co Ltd v Rockwell (FC103) Ltd [2025] UKUT 39 (LC); [2025] H.L.R. 23: representing the Appellant. The Upper Tribunal gave important guidance on the tests of “vertical division” and capacity to be “redeveloped independently” in s. 72(3)(a)-(b) of CLRA 2002. Winston is acting in a pending appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Avon Freeholds Ltd v Cresta Court E RTM Co Ltd [2024] UKUT 335 (LC); [2025] 1 WLR 1262: representing the successful Respondent.
Rahman v Munim [2024] EWCA Civ 123; [2025] 1 BCLC 1: acting for Appellant in Court of Appeal on appeal against dismissal of unfair prejudice petition. Consideration of whether the trial was fair in light of judicial findings of fact that were un-pleaded and/or not fully explored in cross-examination.
A1 Properties (Sunderland) Ltd v Tudor Studios RTM Co Ltd [2024] UKSC 27; [2024] 3 W.L.R. 601: the Supreme Court considered the proper approach for ascertaining Parliament’s intention as to the consequences of failing to comply with the right to manage legislation and upheld the Upper Tribunal’s decision by way of a leapfrog appeal.
A1 Properties (Sunderland) Ltd v Tudor Studios RTM Co Ltd [2023] UKUT 27 (LC); [2023] L. & T.R. 11: following Elim Court v Avon Freeholds [2017] EWCA Civ 89, the Upper Tribunal considered that an RTM company’s failure to serve a claim notice on an intermediate landlord with no management responsibilities did not invalidate its claim, whether or not the failure was deliberate. The Supreme Court upheld the Upper Tribunal’s decision, although for reasons different to the decision in Elim Court.
Yasin v Whitmore Law Solicitors [2021] EWHC B30 (Costs); [2021] Costs LR 1219: Supreme Court Costs Office held that a client could request detailed assessment of a solicitor’s gross sum bill under s. 64(3) of the Solicitors Act 1964 more than 12 months had passed since delivery of the bill and no special circumstances existed to justify assessment under s. 70(2)-(3).
Q Studios (Stoke) RTM Co Ltd v Premier Grounds Rent No. 6 Ltd [2020] UKUT 197 (LC); [2020] H.L.R. 44: Upper Tribunal considered what constitutes a flat for the purposes of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, s. 112(1), and when premises are occupied for residential purposes within meaning of 2002 Act, Sch. 6.
Elim Court RTM Co Ltd v Avon Freeholds Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 89; [2018] Q.B. 571: Court of Appeal considered the correct approach to non-compliance with statutory notice provisions in context of notices seeking the right to manage.

Feedback

‘Winston’s mental agility and general versatility enable him to quickly adapt to new situations and sudden changes in strategy of opponents. He is rarely wrong-footed’: Legal 500

‘Thank you for your help in this multi track trial. The outcome was an unconditional victory, and the clients were very impressed with your performance. As they put it: ‘we believe you all could not have fought harder for us and we certainly couldn’t have wanted for any more. Winston was outstanding. He ran rings around the opposition’: John Gordon, Instructing Solicitor

‘I recently instructed Winston in a complex property damage and boundary case. He provided invaluable advice throughout the process; in particular, on preparation of evidence and settlement offers. His most important contribution was his advocacy at trial. Winston was a highly effective advocate with a good understanding of the law and the complex factual background. He was able to use his knowledge deftly in cross-examination, including of an expert witness. We were able to achieve a great outcome for the client and an indemnity based costs award’: Toby Walker, Instructing Solicitor

Further information

Qualifications

2005 Called to the Bar (Middle Temple)
2004-2005 Bar Vocational Course (Very Competent)
1997-2000 Balliol College, University of Oxford, MA (Hons) in Jurisprudence

Memberships

COMBAR
Chancery Bar Association
Property Bar Association

Background

Before joining the Bar, Winston worked in the Commercial Litigation Department of Norton Rose and in the Insurance/Reinsurance Department of CMS Cameron McKenna.

Real Property

Winston is ranked as a Leading Junior in Property Litigation by the Legal 500. He regularly appears in the County Court and the High Court in a variety of actions and advises on all aspects of property law. He has particular experience of mortgages, including registration of mortgages, mortgagee’s right to possession, tenants of borrowers, LPA receivers and mortgagee’s costs.

His experience includes disputes over beneficial ownership of land (including applications under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996), nuisance, trespass, and property-related professional negligence claims.

His property practice includes the following core areas:

Boundary disputes, Party Wall etc. Act 1996 and adverse possession
Easements
Land Registration
Mortgages and equitable charges (including charging orders)
Professional negligence
Restrictive covenants
Trespass
Trusts of land (express, constructive and resulting and TOLATA claims)

Examples of his work:

Advising and representing defendant in 7-day trial of dispute over beneficial interest in investment property including counterclaim for breach of trust and dishonest assistance
Advising and representing claimant in 5-day trial involving conjoined harassment, debt and TOLATA claims with ownership of 4 properties in issue.
Representing the successful claimants in a 5-day trial of a possession claim involving allegations of constructive/resulting trust and the application of the ex turpi causa principle.
Representing the successful defendant in the 4-day trial of a boundary dispute involving Party Wall Act issues and a claim of substantial structural damage to a building. Obtained an indemnity costs award.
Representing individual alleging beneficial interest in property pursuant to express, resulting or constructive trust and claiming breach of trust by co-owner; co-owner alleging that declaration of trust was a sham.
Representing successful applicant in First-tier Tribunal on reference of her application to Land Registrar to cancel a registered charge on basis that the mortgagee’s title had been extinguished by virtue of the Limitation Act 1980.
McGaan v South [2017] EWHC 307 (QB): representing successful appellant in appeal against award of interest on respondent’s share of proceeds of sale of property; consideration of date from which interest can run on sums due from sale of property the subject of a TOLATA claim.