Andrews & Anor v Cunningham

Andrews & Anor v Cunningham

The tenancy could not be an assured tenancy while Mr Hodges was a resident landlord. After his death and the expiry of the statutory exclusion period, the tenancy became an assured tenancy, but there was no valid notice or provision excluding the assured shorthold presumption under Schedule 2A. The rent book did not constitute a statutory notice, and there was no sufficient written or oral provision to exclude the assured shorthold presumption. Therefore, the tenancy was an assured shorthold tenancy and the order for possession was correct.

Parties
Respondents/claimants: Peter John Andrews and Fernia Margaret Andrews (as Executors of the Estate of William George Hodges, deceased); Appellant/defendant: Graham James Cunningham
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Assured Tenancies, Assured Shorthold Tenancies, Statutory Interpretation, Security of Tenure
Landlord and Tenant Law Assured Tenancies Assured Shorthold Tenancies Statutory Interpretation Security of Tenure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter John Andrews and Fernia Margaret Andrews (as Executors of the Estate of William George Hodges, deceased)

Respondents/claimants

Graham James Cunningham

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tenancy was an assured shorthold tenancy or a non-shorthold assured tenancy under the Housing Act 1988 as amended
  2. 2 Whether the provision of a rent book labelled 'Assured Tenancy' constituted a notice under Schedule 2A of the Housing Act 1988
  3. 3 Whether an oral agreement or the rent book could satisfy the statutory requirements to exclude the assured shorthold presumption

Ratio Decidendi

The tenancy could not be an assured tenancy while Mr Hodges was a resident landlord. After his death and the expiry of the statutory exclusion period, the tenancy became an assured tenancy, but there was no valid notice or provision excluding the assured shorthold presumption under Schedule 2A. The rent book did not constitute a statutory notice, and there was no sufficient written or oral provision to exclude the assured shorthold presumption. Therefore, the tenancy was an assured shorthold tenancy and the order for possession was correct.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order for possession of the Flat confirmed in favour of the respondents