If ‘suitable alternative accommodation’ was offered in exchange for a protected tenancy, the court need look only for some security for the tenant, not that he should receive equal protection. Where the landlord persuades the Rent Act protected tenants to surrender their old tenancy before taking a new tenancy, the lessees would not have been Rent Act tenants ‘immediately before the tenancy was granted’, but ‘Sub-paragraph (b) of section 34(1) is clearly designed to shield the tenant who had security of tenure under the 1977 Act and who has been persuaded by his landlord to enter into a new tenancy after January 15, 1989 so as to prevent him from losing the 1977 Act protection. It is designed to defeat an argument that the tenant has lost his 1977 Act protection because he has voluntarily surrendered the tenancy entered into prior to January 15, 1989 which attracted the provisions of the 1977 Act in exchange for a new tenancy which, being post January 15, 1989, did not qualify for that security. Section 34(1)(b) has in my opinion no application in a case such as the present where the landlord has gone to the court and obtained an order for possession.’
. . And ‘I can see no reason why section 34(1)(b) ought to be read subject to the suggested limitation; a view apparently shared by the judge in the case of Goringe v Twinsactra Ltd decided on April 20 1994, reported in the Legal Action Group Bulletin for June 1994 at 11.’
Judges:
Roche LJ Sir Brian Neill
Citations:
Gazette 26-Feb-1998, Times 23-Feb-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 197, (1998) 30 HLR 1099
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Secretarial and Nominee Co Ltd v Thomas and others CA 29-Jul-2005
The court was asked about transitional arrangements for Rent Act tenants after the 1988 Act: ‘If A, a Rent Act tenant, takes a new tenancy agreement after the commencement of the 1988 Act jointly with B, does B thereafter partake in the ongoing . .
See Also – Laimond Properties Limited and Christina Raeuchle CA 18-Aug-1999
Application for leave to appeal granted. . .
See Also – Laimond Properties Ltd v Raeuchle CA 24-Jan-2000
The landlord acquired the freehold of a small block of flats in 1993. The defendant had been a tenant protected under the Rent Acts since 1976. He also made use of a neighburing empty room without paying rent. His rent was nearly all paid through . .
Applied – Arogol Company Ltd v Rajah CA 21-Mar-2001
Defendant’s appeal from an order granting the claimant a possession order in respect of a ground floor flat. The basic question in the proceedings was whether the defendant had a tenancy protected under the Rent Act 1977.
Held: The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Housing
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.143675