Click the case name for better results:

Potts v Densley and Another: QBD 6 May 2011

The claimant had been a shorthold tenant. The landlord had failed to secure the deposit as required, but offered to repay it after the determination of the tenancy. The claimant now appealed against a refusal of an award of three times the deposit. Held: The appeal failed. Sharp J said: ‘section 214(4) is mandatory in … Continue reading Potts v Densley and Another: QBD 6 May 2011

Tiensia v Vision Enterprises Ltd (T/A Universal Estates): CA 11 Nov 2010

The court was asked whether, where a landlord had failed to comply with the requirement to place a deposit received with a tenancy deposit scheme within fourteen days, the tenant was entitled to the penalties imposed by the Act despite later compliance, and whether the TDS scheme’s own conditions were part of the requirement. Held: … Continue reading Tiensia v Vision Enterprises Ltd (T/A Universal Estates): CA 11 Nov 2010

Ayannuga v Swindells: CA 6 Nov 2012

The tenant appealed against refusal of penalties impose for the non-securing of a tenants deposit. The deposit had been secured, and the court had found that the landlord had substantially complied with the notice requirements by matters in the tenancy agreement. Held: The tenant’s appeal was allowed. The judge had reached a conclusion quite outside … Continue reading Ayannuga v Swindells: CA 6 Nov 2012

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts