Portsmouth City Council v Bryant: CA 2000

It may be unreasonable to impose a possession order against a person in respect of a failing over which they have no control.
Simon Brown LJ said, having reviewed the existing authorities: ‘Those authorities clearly hold that no personal fault on the tenant’s part is required to bring a case within ground 2, although this consideration will come into play when deciding whether or not to make a possession order and, if so, whether to suspend it.’
Sedley LJ said: ‘I agree with my Lord that the true meaning of ground 2 in schedule 2 to the 1985 Housing Act (as amended) is its natural and ordinary meaning. A tenant may face possession proceedings not only if he or she has offended in one of the ways specified, but if someone who lives with or visits the tenant has done so. The rigours of this provision, which in its second limb may be independent of any fault on the tenant’s part, is mitigated by the requirement of section 84(2) that no possession order may be made unless the court considers it reasonable to do so. It may very well be unreasonable to make even a suspended order against somebody who will be powerless to rectify the situation and it will almost certainly be unreasonable to make an outright order against such a person. There are, after all, other legal expedients, not least under the Prevention from Harassment Act 1997, by which those guilty of anti-social conduct can be directly punished or restrained.’

Judges:

Sedley LJ, Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

(2000) 32 HLR 906

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 Sch2G2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKnowsley Housing Trust v McMullen CA 9-May-2006
The defendant tenant appealed an order for possession of her flat. She was disabled and living with her 19 year old son. He had been made subject to an anti-social behaviour order. The court had found that she could have required him to leave. The . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.242873