Issue 39 - 27th November 2006

Monday 27 November 2006

Share This Page

Email This Page

Government & Legislation

On  22 November 2006 the Government announced details of the successful bidders who will operate the National Tenancy Deposit Scheme for assured shorthold tenancies from April 2007. For the details click here

Cases

Cumbria Police v Wright [2006] All ER (D) 265 (Nov), 20 November 2006. The police served a closure notice on a house and sought a closure order under sections 1 and 2 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003. The defendants admitted that the house had been used in relation to category A drugs but denied that the premises were associated with nuisance or disorder. The police led evidence of nuisance which was not drug related. The order was refused. The Divisional Court dismissed an appeal. The requisite nuisance or disorder had to derive from the drug-relate use of the premises to justify a closure order.

Cahusac v Moncure [2006] UKPC 54, 22 November 2006. A tenant held a five year lease with an option to renew for a further five years at an increased rent. At the expiry of the tenancy, the tenant sought to exercise the option and paid the higher rent for several years. The landlord then gave notice to quit claiming that the option had not been validly exercised and sought possession. The Privy Council held that the option to renew had not been validly exercised but that the landlord’s conduct in accepting the increased rent over many years amounted to a representation that the tenant was being treated as enjoying a new five year term. In those circumstances the notice to quit could not be relied upon and the possession claim should be dismissed. For the transcript, click here

Lewis v Havering LBC [2006] All ER (D) 323 (Nov), 23 November 2006. Mr Lewis applied as homeless but was found not to be in priority need. He appealed to the county court against that decision and asked for accommodation pending appeal. The council refused. He appealed that decision, contending that the council had failed to consider the merits of his main appeal. In the county court, the judge allowed the council to put in a witness statement from its officer indicating that he had considered “all the documents." The Court of Appeal dismissed a further appeal. It was appropriate in such cases for the merits of the first appeal to be considered and the evidence showed that had been done.

Coming Up

4 December 2006 Housing Allocation and Homelessness A Jordan Publishing Seminar. London. For details click here
5 December 2006. Tackling Anti Social Behaviour. A Northern Housing Consortium Conference. Harrogate. For details click here 
6 December 2006. Residential Landlord & Tenant. Professional Conferences. London. For details click here
7 and 8 December 2006. Housing Management Conference. Lime Legal. London and Manchester. For details click here 
8 December 2006. Social Housing Law Association. Annual Conference. London. For details click here  
13 December 2006. Housing Law Practitioners Association. Annual Conference. London For details click here

Latest tweets from Garden Court Chambers

Follow us on Twitter

Tweets by gardencourtlaw

We are top ranked by independent legal directories and consistently win awards

+ View more awards