The party wall world is relatively small, the stage of this world contains a number of world known players, Mr Antino is one of these well known players and so are his owners instructing solicitor Mr Ashley Bean of littlestone cowanHHJ Bailey   5-5-16

Master Bailey sits in the TCC and was appointed an Assistant Recorder in 1992, a Recorder in 1997 and has been a Circuit Judge (SE Circuit) since 2000, presently representing London civil judges on the Committee of the Council of Circuit Judges. He has written books on insolvency law and is the English representative on the Judicial Wing of Insol-Europe.

Posted on May 6, 2016 .


The appeal was a preliminary hearing of two points in respect of an Award served by Mr Antino and a surveyor appointed by Mr Antino under s.10(4) on behalf of the Building Owners the Appellants.   HHJ Luba  QC sitting in the Cental London County Court held "In my judgment the Award is valid, the use of s.10(4) was the appropriate procedure given the Building Owners refusal to appoint a surveyor. A dispute had arisen that satisfied s.10 procedures, The Award is an impressive piece of work".  

-HHJ Luba QC Schmid v Hulls and AthananasouCentral London County Court [2016]

Posted on March 8, 2016 .


In the appeal of an ex-parte Award served by Mr Antino on behalf of the respondents,  HHJ Platt held "In my judgment the respondent is correct.  Mr Antino’s contention that “it is not a matter for negotiation directly between one surveyor and the other surveyors client”.  Since I have determined that the ex-parte Award was valid the court is still able to determine the Award and under the statutory powers to modify the Award if appropriate.

I am grateful to Mr Antino suggesting that I now determine the Award issue “I accept that Mr Antino’s hourly rate is not in my judgment unreasonable.  It follows that the fee set out in the ex-parte Award had been properly justified and I therefore award Mr Antino’s fees”.

- HHJ Platt [2007] Bansal v Myers Romford County Court

Posted on July 23, 2015 .


"Mr Antino is a palpable witness, Mr Antino's explanation of the unique attributes of  the "Thompson Plan" greatly assisted the Court to understand the location and extent of the claimants boundaries. Mr Antino's expertise as a master mason persuaded the Court that the boundary "wall" was  a retaining wall wholly within the claimant's land and not as contested by the defendants the remains of a previous structure on their land "

- HH Judge Hildyard [2015] Best & Best  v Perkins & Dennis  Luton County Court.

Posted on July 7, 2015 .


“I have known Philip for many years as a surveyor, he is a very good surveyor, as this book shows he is a very good author and this book can only advance his reputation”

– HH Judge Philip Bartle QC.

Posted on June 25, 2015 .


“Mr Antino is an acknowledged expert in the field of party wall issues”

– HH Judge Murfitt QC 2013.

Posted on June 25, 2015 .