Home Case Law Library Page 3

Case Law Library

Vadamalayan v Steward and Others [2020]

Vadamalayan v Steward and Others [2020] UKUT 0183

This case was for a Rent Repayment Order (RRO) relating to an unlicensed house in multiple occupation. The First-tier tribunal (FTT) awarded a RRO but the landlord appealed because he thought the amount he had been ordered to pay was excessive given the amount he had spent on the property. The initial decision by the FTT was based on Parker v Waller (2012) UKUT 301 in that section 74(5) of the Housing Act 2004 provided that a RRO in favour of an occupier had to be ‘such an amount as the tribunal considers reasonable in the circumstances’ and it would not be correct to impose a penalty exceeding the landlord’s profit for renting out the property during the relevant period. In Parker v Waller it was cited that

[...]

View »

Trecarrel House Limited v Rouncefield [2020]

Trecarrel House Limited v Rouncefield 2020 EWCA Civ 760

In this case the tenancy was an Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) of a self-contained flat in a domestic property which was granted on 13th February 2019.  The heating and hot water were provided by a boiler outside of the flat.  A gas safety certificate had not been issued or displayed before the start of the tenancy but the landlord provided the tenant with one prior to service of the section 21 notice on 1st May 2018.

The issues in this case revisit those which were considered by HHJ Luba QC in the case of Caridon Property Ltd v Monty Shooltz as to whether the landlord breached the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 (GSR 1998) and the Assured Shorthold Tenancy Notices and Prescribed Requirements (England) Regulations 2015 which prevented him from relying on the section 21 notice.

At the first hearing it was found that

[...]

View »

Trecarrel House Limited v Rouncefield [2020]

Trecarrel House Limited v Rouncefield 2020 EWCA Civ 760

In this case the tenancy was an Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) of a self-contained flat in a domestic property which was granted on 13th February 2019.  The heating and hot water were provided by a boiler outside of the flat.  A gas safety certificate had not been issued or displayed before the start of the tenancy but the landlord provided the tenant with one prior to service of the section 21 notice on 1st May 2018.

The issues in this case revisit those which were considered by HHJ Luba QC in the case of Caridon Property Ltd v Monty Shooltz as to whether the landlord breached the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 (GSR 1998) and the Assured Shorthold Tenancy Notices and Prescribed Requirements (England) Regulations 2015 which prevented him from relying on the section 21 notice.

At the first hearing it was found that

[...]

View »

Trecarrel House Limited v Rouncefield [2020]

Trecarrel House Limited v Rouncefield 2020 EWCA Civ 760

In this case the tenancy was an Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) of a self-contained flat in a domestic property which was granted on 13th February 2019.  The heating and hot water were provided by a boiler outside of the flat.  A gas safety certificate had not been issued or displayed before the start of the tenancy but the landlord provided the tenant with one prior to service of the section 21 notice on 1st May 2018.

The issues in this case revisit those which were considered by HHJ Luba QC in the case of Caridon Property Ltd v Monty Shooltz as to whether the landlord breached the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 (GSR 1998) and the Assured Shorthold Tenancy Notices and Prescribed Requirements (England) Regulations 2015 which prevented him from relying on the section 21 notice.

At the first hearing it was found that

[...]

View »

Goldsborough & Anor v CA Property Management Ltd & Ors [2019]

Goldsborough & Anor v CA Property Management Ltd & Ors [2019] UKUT 311

This case relates to a property owner and an intermediate rent to rent company who granted tenancies of an unlicensed house in multiple occupation.  The owners of the property Mr and Mrs Gardner had granted a 5 year lease to CA Property Management Ltd .  The two bedroom flat had been converted into five bedrooms .  Mr and Mrs Gardner were responsible for insuring the property, maintaining the external and internal structure, gas, electrical systems and heating, the safety of electricity and gas supplies to the property and paying the cost of obtaining a gas safety certificate, NICEIC certificate and energy performance certificate.

Two of the tenants made an application to the First-tier Tribunal for a Rent Repayment Order.  Mr Goldsborough applied against both CA Property Management (for harassment and illegal eviction) and Mr and Mrs Gardner (occupation and control of an unlicensed house in multiple occupation).  Mr Swart applied against only Mr and Mrs Gardner on the ground of operating and controlling an unlicensed house in multiple occupation. 

The First-tier Tribunal decided that CA Property Management was the landlord and both Rent Repayment Orders were made against the management company.  The decision was appealed. 

[...]

View »

Rogerson v Bolsover District Council [2019]

Rogerson v Bolsover District Council [2019] EWCA Civ 226, 26 February 2019

Mrs Rogerson, a council tenant, had a tenancy which started on 7th September 2014.  Mrs Rogerson was mowing the front garden when she stepped backwards onto an inspection cover which gave way.  She fell through the cover into the sewerage void beneath.  The cover and support were owned by Severn Trent Water.  Mrs Rogerson suffered injuries, loss and damage as a result of the incident and made a claim against the landlord (Bolsover District Council). The question here is when is the landlord's duty under section 4 Defective Premises Act 1972 engaged and is there any duty to inspect.  The landlord had conducted an inspection of the property in May 2013 and a survey in January 2014.  Expert evidence showed that the manhole, the void and the cover would be about 40 to 60 years old and it was clear that it was beginning to corrode away causing the support provided by the framework to deteriorate over a period of time.  This meant that the inspection cover was not able to take the tenant's weight and it is likely that the corrosion with the rain water has affected the mortor and, therefore caused the stability of the inspection cover to fail.  The District Judge found that

[...]

View »

New Crane Wharf Freehold Ltd v Dovener [2019]

New Crane Wharf Freehold Ltd v Dovener [2019] UKUT 98 (LC)

In this case the lease contained a clause (Clause 3.08) which stated 'to permit the lessor and its agents and workmen at all reasonable times on giving not less than forty eight hours notice (except in case of emergency) to enter the Demised Premises for .........'  The landlord wrote to the tenant on two occasions requiring access to inspect the property and both letters proposed dates and times for access to the property.  The tenant did not respond to the first letter but in a later email demanded to know why the landlord required access as it was an invasion of privacy and breach of the tenant's quiet enjoyment of the property.  The tenant gave no response to the second letter.  The landlord stated that they had a right to inspect the property under Clause 3.08 but did not give the exact reason as to why they wanted to inspect the property.  There was no evidence that the landlord or contractors had attended the property and attempted to obtain access.  The landlord made an application to the First-Tier Tribunal

[...]

View »

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.

[...]

View »

Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Williams & Anor (2018)

[...]

View »

Caridon Property Ltd v Monty Shooltz. Cent. London County Ct (2018)

Caridon Property Ltd v Monty Shooltz. Central London County Court, 2nd February 2018

The landlord served a section 21 notice on the tenant but it was argued that as the gas safety certificate was not provided to the tenant before the tenant took up occupation of the property the section 21 notice was invalid.  The landlord had not served the certificate prior to occupation but argued that he had provided the tenant with a copy of the gas safety certificate 11 months after the start of the tenancy.  DJ Bloom found that the landlord had breached Regulation 36(3) of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 which made the s21 notice invalid.  The landlord appealed and

[...]

View »

Howard Davies v Scott (2018)

[...]

View »

Caridon Property Ltd v Monty Shooltz. Central London County Court (2018)

Caridon Property Ltd v Monty Shooltz. Central London County Court, 2nd February 2018

The landlord served a section 21 notice on the tenant but it was argued that as the gas safety certificate was not provided to the tenant before the tenant took up occupation of the property the section 21 notice was invalid.  The landlord had not served the certificate prior to occupation but argued that he had provided the tenant with a copy of the gas safety certificate 11 months after the start of the tenancy.  DJ Bloom found that the landlord had breached Regulation 36(3) of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 which made the s21 notice invalid.  The landlord appealed and

[...]

View »