Copping v Surrey County Council: CA 21 Dec 2005

The tenants appealed rejection of their application that they should pay the price for their council property set on the first of two notices to buy it.
Held: As to whether the tenants had impliedly withdrawn their first notice: ‘[B]ecause of the way in which I consider that this appeal should be determined, it would not be helpful to examine the extent to which this decision affects the arguments on abandonment, waiver and estoppel which occupied much of the time before Nelson J. [Counsel for the tenants’] further point that since a notice has by section 122 to be withdrawn in writing, and provision is made expressly for withdrawal elsewhere, the Act must clearly have envisaged that if a claim under section 122 is denied, but not withdrawn in writing, it should remain effective is unattractive. It seems to me to ignore reality. Section 122 (3) is really directed to ensuring that the tenant can bring the procedure to an end at any stage that he wishes, in particular before the landlord has served his notice under section 122(3)
Had I come to a different conclusion as to the effect of the claim determined [in the first set of proceedings in the county court], I would have doubted, therefore, how a notice could have been resurrected more than 12 years after it had been served. The whole emphasis of the Statutory Scheme is that the parties should act promptly.’

Judges:

Latham LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1604

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 122(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromCopping v Surrey County Council QBD 2005
The tenants served notice under s122 in 1991 to purchase their council house. The authority denied their right to buy. Nothing happened until June 2001 when the tenants served a second notice and received the same response. By reference to, and upon . .

Cited by:

CitedMartin v Medina Housing Association Ltd CA 31-Mar-2006
The former tenant had set out to buy the council house, but had written to say that she did not intend to go ahead. Her son who had taken over the tenancy after her death now sought, twelve years later, to require the authority to proceed at that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.236609