Case Summary:

Title: Mountain v Hastings (1993)

 Court of Appeal, March 23 1993.  Housing Act 1988 - Assured tenancy - Whether notice seeking possession under s8 was in prescribed form by reason of failing to provide the full text of each ground for possession relied upon.

Henry Mountain v Joanna Hastings

APPEAL UPHELD.  Preston County Court awarded possession.  Tenant appealed.  Section 8 notice was defective.  S8 Notice should be in prescribed form

Court of Appeal considered whether a notice seeking possession under section 8 of the Housing Act 1988 was in the prescribed form by reason of it failing to provide the full text of each of the grounds of possession relied upon.

In this case, the tenant held a monthly tenancy of a flat and in July 1992, the plaintiff served a notice seeking possession under section 8 on the grounds 8,10,11,12,13 & 14 of Schedule 1 of the 1988 Act. 

On a separate sheet the plaintiff stated inter alia, "the landllord intends to seek possession...... Gound 8.  At least three months rent is unpaid".

HELD:
Appeal was allowed. S8 notice was defective because it did not specify ground 8 in adequate words.  The ground in schedule 2 may validly be "specified in the notice" as required by Parliament in words different from those in which the ground is set out in the schedule, provided that the words used set out fully the substance of the ground so that the notice is adequate to acheive the legislative purpose of the provision.  The notice did not specify the ground in adequate words - and was therefore invalid.

Full citation: Mountain v Hastings[1993] 29 EG 96