Love v Heggarty

In a classic 'moonlight flit' case, a landlord who had considered the tenants to have surrendered the property had not been  wrong, and had been unjustified in changing the locks and reletting the property.

A landlord let a flat on a verbal weekly assured tenancy to a couple. The tenants did not pay the rent and arrears began to mount up, so the landlord served an ordinary 4 week notice to quit. This was ineffective.
The landlord claimed that after giving notice one of the tenants had indicated that they would move out, and he said that he saw them packing. On the day that the notice expired the landlord went to the flat, and found the tenants’ belongings in plastic bags. He removed these bags, and changed the locks.  Shortly afterwards, the landlord relet the flat.
The tenants later returned to the flat, and found the new tenant in occupation. They obtained an injunction from the Court that they be permitted to return to the property.  The landlord appealed against this injunction.

HELD: The Court of Appeal decided that the tenants were still assured tenants of the property. The court held that the landlord could not argue that the assured tenancy had come to an end, because the tenants had not unequivocally given up possession to the landlord.  The landlord had therefore not been justified in changing the locks and reletting the property.