Kahlon v Isherwood

Kahlon v Isherwood

The Tomlin schedule did not contain all substantive elements of the prescribed Form 8 notice, particularly the warning and acknowledgment of loss of security of tenure, and was not served prior to the contract for the new tenancy. Therefore, the statutory requirements for conversion to an assured shorthold tenancy were not met, and the tenancy remained an assured tenancy.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Jasbir Kaur Kahlon; Defendant/appellant: Andrew Isherwood
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court (order for Possession)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order for possession set aside; case remitted to County Court.
Legal Topics
Assured Tenancy, Assured Shorthold Tenancy, Notices Under Housing Act 1988, Possession Proceedings, Validity of Statutory Notices
Landlord and Tenant Law Assured Tenancy Assured Shorthold Tenancy Notices Under Housing Act 1988 Possession Proceedings Validity of Statutory Notices

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jasbir Kaur Kahlon

Claimant/respondent

Andrew Isherwood

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court (order for Possession)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tomlin schedule constituted a valid notice under paragraph 7(2) of Schedule 2A to the Housing Act 1988 for conversion from an assured tenancy to an assured shorthold tenancy
  2. 2 Whether the requirements for form and timing of notice were satisfied so as to create an assured shorthold tenancy

Ratio Decidendi

The Tomlin schedule did not contain all substantive elements of the prescribed Form 8 notice, particularly the warning and acknowledgment of loss of security of tenure, and was not served prior to the contract for the new tenancy. Therefore, the statutory requirements for conversion to an assured shorthold tenancy were not met, and the tenancy remained an assured tenancy.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order for possession set aside; case remitted to County Court.

Orders

  • Order for possession set aside
  • Case remitted to County Court for reconsideration on basis that tenancy is assured, not assured shorthold