Rogers v Lambeth London Borough Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 29 October 1999 |
| Date | 29 October 1999 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
COURT OF APPEAL
Before Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Otton and Lord Justice Mummery.
Housing - former secure tenancy revived - council retrospectively liable for disrepair
Where a local authority had obtained but had not yet enforced a possession order against a former secure tenant who continued to live in the premises as a tolerated trespasser, the postponement of the date of possession or the discharge of the possession order by the court under section 85 of the Housing Act 1985 revived the tenancy and made the local authority retrospectively liable to the tenant for disrepair of the premises during the "limbo period".
The Court of Appeal so stated dismissing an appeal by the defendant, Lambeth London Borough Council, from the decision of Judge Gibson sitting at the Lambeth County Court on November 23, 1998.
The plaintiff, Hawa Rogers, fell into arrears with the rent and on October 13, 1992 the court made an order for possession which was suspended so long as the tenant punctually paid the arrears by instalments of Pounds 5 a week in addition to the current rent. By December she was in breach of that order and later failed to comply with the terms of an agreement made with the council on May 31, 1994. She remained in occupation and continued to make erratic payments.
On September 1996 she started proceedings against the council claiming breach of the express repairing obligations under the tenancy agreement. The council denied liability and pleaded that as the plaintiff had not complied with the order of October 13, 1992 she had ceased to be a tenant and was not entitled to enforce the repairing covenant.
By April 1997, the council had repaired the premises but the proceedings continued. On September 12, 1997 the plaintiff applied under section 85 of the 1985 Act for orders that the 1992 possession order be discharged or that the date of possession be postponed on the ground that she had adhered to the agreement of May 31, 1994.
On April 20, 1998 the plaintiff made an agreement with the council to pay off the rent arrears of Pounds 2,051.32. The agreement was silent on both the pending claim and the pending application to discharge the possession order or to postpone the date for possession.
On September 2, 1998 the application to postpone the date for possession was amended to ask that should the plaintiff be successful in that application and recover damages for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pemberton v Southwark London Borough Council
...being revived under s. 85(4) of the Act. 25 An example of a secure tenancy being revived is to be found in the case of Lambeth London Borough Council -v—Rogers [2000] 03 EG 127. In that case R had become a secure tenant of premises owned by the council in February 1992. In October 1992 the ......
-
Dunn and another v Bradford Metropolitan District Council
...having come to an end, the mutual covenants which it contained have fallen away and cannot be enforced by either party – see Lambeth London Borough Council v Rogers [2000] LGR 191, 200g-h. 7 The former tenant who remains in possession after his secure tenancy has come to an end – that is to......
-
Knowsley Housing Trust v White ; Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association
...deceased mother's secure tenancy when, at the time of her death, the mother was a tolerated trespasser (she could not). In Lambeth London Borough Council v Rogers (1999) 32 HLR 361, the issue was whether a secure tenant could sue the landlord for damages for breach of its repairing covenant......
-
London and Quadrant Housing Trust v Ansell
...for possession, the court may decide to vary the possession order by a further order postponing the date of possession: see Lambeth Borough Council v Rogers (1999) 32 HLR 361, 367. There is the further possibility that, on the tenant complying with the conditions imposed by an order made u......