Yetunde Dania, Partner at Trowers & Hamlins LLP, considers a recent county court appeal that dealt with stock transfer RPs and the use of mandatory ground 7A. The tenancy agreement listed the grounds for possession upon which the RP would seek to rely to recover possession with ground 7A not in existence when the tenancy was entered into.
Adrian Davis, barrister at Field Court Chambers, examines the Court of Appeal’s decision in Smith v Khan upon the correct measure of general damages for trespass in unlawful eviction cases when a claimant does not pursue a claim for reinstatement to the property.
There has recently been some widespread legal commentary on the requirements contained within the Assured Shorthold Tenancy Notices and Prescribed Requirements (England) Regulations 20165 SI No 1646 and Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 SI No 2451 in light of a recent decision made by His Honour Judge Luba QC in Caridon Property Ltd v Shooltz, County Court at Central London (2 February 2018).
The Court of Appeal has decided that interim relief can only be sought via s.204A Housing Act 1996 if the s.204 appeal is challenging a review decision rather than the original decision – Davis v Watford Borough Council  EWCA Civ 529.
Michael Paget and Zoë Whittington of Cornerstone Barristers, who acted for Watford Borough Council, explain the decision.
On 3 April 2018 the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 commenced, providing a number of new duties on housing authorities to provide early intervention to prevent homelessness. The Act makes significant amendments and additions to the Housing Act 1996.
This, in essence, is the question at the heart of the long-running case of London Borough of Haringey v. Simawi. The question will be answered at trial in October 2018 following judgment in LB Haringey v Mulkhis Simawi and The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government  EWHC 290 (QB)
Mathew McDermott discusses this potentially very important judgment.