The borough obtained a possession order of the secure tenancy of a flat occupied by their tenant for nuisance. It was suspended on terms for a certain period. They alleged further breaches shortly before the expiry of the possession order and they asked the period to be extended. The tenant did not appear at the first hearing, and the judge extended the term and made other provisions. The tenant now argued that the moving of the date revived his secure tenancy under the rule in Burrows.
Held: The tenant’s appeal was dismissed. It was impossible to see the judge’s order as being intended to revive the tenancy with Burrows type consequences: ‘ the combination of the two orders had exactly the reverse effect. That the judge kept in place the application to enforce the sanction imposed for the original breaches of the tenancy showed quite clearly that the last thing that he saw himself as doing was to relieve the tenant from the consequences of those breaches.’
 EWCA Civ 68, Times 27-Feb-2006
Housing Act 1985 Sch2 Gr2
England and Wales
Cited – Burrows v Brent London Borough Council HL 31-Oct-1996
The authority had obtained a possession order from its secure tenant but then agreed to accept payments toward the arrears. The tenant applied for and was granted a declaration that she had on that agreement acquired a new tenancy. The authority . .
Cited – Thompson v Elmbridge Borough Council CA 1987
The wife was the secure tenant of the premises, against whom the local authority landlord obtained a possession order on grounds of arrears of rent, not to be enforced on payment of a weekly sum off the arrears in addition to what the order . .
Cited – Greenwich London Borough Council v Regan CA 31-Jan-1996
The authority had taken possession proceedings against the secure tenant for non-payment of rent, and obtained an order, suspended on condition as to payments. He again fell into arrears, and the authority made a further agreement. They now sought . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 January 2021; Ref: scu.238524