Knowsley Housing Trust v White

Ratio Decidendi

Facts

Mrs White was granted a weekly tenancy of 34 Chesterfield Drive, Tower Hill, Kirkby, Liverpool by Knowsley Borough Council on 19 April 1993, which was a secure tenancy under the Housing Act 1985. When Knowsley Housing Trust acquired the council's entire housing stock in 2002 she became an assured tenant under the Housing Act 1988 instead, but kept a preserved right to buy. She fell into arrears; Knowsley obtained a possession order in 2004 that was later suspended on payment terms, and she then breached those terms while still making some payments and, in January 2005, served notice claiming the right to buy. Knowsley argued that her breach of the suspended order's terms had already brought her tenancy to an end (making her a mere 'tolerated trespasser'), so that she no longer had a right to buy by the time she claimed it.

Judgment Summary

The House of Lords (Lord Neuberger, with whom the other Law Lords agreed on this point) held that, unlike a secure tenancy under the Housing Act 1985, an assured tenancy under the Housing Act 1988 does not end merely because the tenant breaches the terms of a suspended possession order -- it continues until the order for possession is actually executed or the tenant otherwise gives up possession. Because the 1988 Act, unlike the 1985 Act, contains no provision saying when an assured tenancy subject to a possession order ends, and its scheme mirrors the Rent Act 1977 (under which a regulated tenancy does not end until possession is delivered up), the 'tolerated trespasser' doctrine developed for secure tenancies does not apply to assured tenancies. Mrs White's tenancy therefore remained an assured tenancy throughout, and her appeal was allowed.

Subsequent Treatment