The appellant had a personality dosorder. Her parents bought a house and granted her series of assured shorthold tenancies. After they fell into rrears on the morgtgage, the bank appointed receivers. The rent then also hell into arears, and they obtained an order for possession. She appealed against an order, saying that the duty to act proportionately under the Human Rights Act fell also as against a private landlord, and that the Court must read the 1980Act to give a discretion to allow for her human rights.
Held: The tenant’s appeal failed. Article 8 could not be invoked by a residential occupier in possession proceedings brought by a private sector landowner, as a ground for opposing the making of, or the terms of, the order for possession. However, they considered that, if article 8 could have been invoked in this case, the judge would have been wrong to dismiss the claim as he had indicated that he would have done.
Arden, Tomlinson, Ryder LJJ
[2014] EWCA Civ 1049, [2014] 2 P and CR 20, [2015] 2 WLR 567, [2015] Ch 357, [2014] HLR 43, [2014] WLR(D) 336, [2014] BPIR 1270, [2015] 1 All ER 1041, [2015] 1 CH 357, [2015] Ch 359, [2014] 3 EGLR 30
Bailii, WLRD
European Convention on Human Rights 8, Human Rights Act 1998, Housing Act 1980
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – McDonald v McDonald and Others SC 15-Jun-2016
Her parents had bought a house and granted tenancies to their adult daughter (the appellant), who suffered a personality disorder. They became unable to repay the mortgage. Receivers were appointed but the appellant fell into arrears with the rent. . .
Cited – Watts v Stewart and Others CA 8-Dec-2016
The court considered the status of residents of almshouses, and in particular whether they were licensees or tenants with associated security.
Held: The occupier’s appeal failed: ‘We do not accept the proposition that, if and insofar as Mrs . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Housing, Human Rights
Updated: 17 December 2021; Ref: scu.535254