After a warrant for possession has been executed, the court’s inherent jurisdiction to re-instate a tenant is available only where the original judgment is set aside or there is shown to have been some abuse of process in the obtaining of the warrant. The court made it clear that it cannot add to the requirements of the rules by treating failure to give notice to the occupier of the obtaining of a warrant for possession as being oppressive or an abuse of process.
Citations:
[1986] 19 HLR 145
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Chater v Mortgage Agency Services Number Two Ltd CA 3-Apr-2003
The plaintiff mortgagee had had his warrant for possession executed. He now appealed against an order re-instating the mortgagor to possession.
Held: The wife had been unaware of the charge, and had not been made party to the proceedings. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant, Housing
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.199713
