Birmingham City Council v Ashton: CA 29 Nov 2012

The council challenged a decision as to their claim for possession of a ground floor flat where the court granted a possession order but suspended possession on terms that the Respondent (1) complied with his tenancy agreement and (2) obeyed the Injunction Order made on that date. The appeal is as to the correctness of the decision to suspend the possession order.
Treacy LJ said: ‘The onus should be on the party who seeks to have the benefit of suspension of a possession order . . to provide cogent evidence to show that what can generally be characterised as anti-social behaviour will not recur, or will be unlikely to do so.’
Mummery, Patten, Treacy LJJ
[2012] EWCA Civ 1557, [2013] HLR 8
Housing Act 1985
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRoyal Borough of Greenwich v Tuitt CA 25-Nov-2014
The Defendant appealed against the order for possession made against her in respect of her secure tenancy of a flat, made on the grounds that her son, now 18 years old and living with her and her partner, had committed repeated acts of nuisance and . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 April 2021; Ref: scu.466406