The Housing Association had obtained a possession order against the appellant family, who now sought a stay of execution pending their appeal.
Held: The presence of children in the house meant that the balance had to include consideration of their interests. The family had been involved in numerous neighbour disputes and had been made subject to Anti-Social Behaviour orders the effect of which would be to exclude them from the home. No discussions had taken place as to the children’s schooling arrangements, and no warning given of the applications for immediate orders. Since the interim stay, the family appeared to have abided by the orders. A stay should be granted but the family would have to note that any breaches would put them in contempt of court.
Judges:
Brooke, Dyson LJJ
Citations:
Times 13-Jan-2005
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Hammond Suddard, Solicitors v Agrichem International Holdings Limited CA 18-Dec-2001
The appellant sought staying the order for him to pay costs pending the results of an appeal, and the respondent sought security for costs in fighting the appeal, and a striking out in default of payment, and for security for payment of the . .
Cited by:
See Also – Moat Housing Group-South Ltd v Harris and Another CA 16-Mar-2005
The defendant family was served without notice with an anti-social behaviour order ordering them to leave their home immediately, and making other very substantial restrictions. The evidence in large part related to other people entirely.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Housing
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.221424
