TFS Stores Ltd v The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner Ltd & Ors

TFS Stores Ltd v The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner Ltd & Ors

The automatic stay imposed by PD 51Z and the 2020 Rules applies to both appeals because the proceedings, by virtue of counterclaims and consent orders for possession, became proceedings for possession brought under CPR Part 55. The stay is blanket in nature and cannot be circumvented by technical distinctions between claims and counterclaims or by the form of pleadings. The hearing of the appeal is vacated and can only proceed after the stay ends or if the parties agree under the exceptions in PD 51Z.

Parties
Appellant/tenant/claimant/defendant: TFS Stores Limited; Respondent/landlord/defendant/claimant: The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner Limited; Respondent/landlord/defendant: British Overseas Bank Nominees Limited; Respondent/landlord/defendant: WGTC Nominees Limited; Respondent/landlord/claimant: BMG (Ashford) Limited; Respondent/landlord/claimant: UK OM (LP2) (GP) Limited; Respondent/landlord/claimant: UK OM (LP2) Limited; Respondent/landlord/claimant: The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (York) General Partner Limited; Respondent/landlord/claimant: UK OM (LP3) (GP) Limited; Respondent/landlord/claimant: UK (OM) (LP3) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal; Application to Vacate Hearing Due to Automatic Stay Under PD 51 Z and 2020 Rules
Outcome
Appeal hearing vacated due to automatic stay under PD 51Z and the 2020 Rules.
Legal Topics
Automatic Stay of Possession Proceedings, Practice Direction 51 Z, CPR Part 55, Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, Possession Orders, Covid 19 Emergency Court Rules

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TFS Stores Limited

Appellant/tenant/claimant/defendant

The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner Limited

Respondent/landlord/defendant/claimant

British Overseas Bank Nominees Limited

Respondent/landlord/defendant

WGTC Nominees Limited

Respondent/landlord/defendant

BMG (Ashford) Limited

Respondent/landlord/claimant

UK OM (LP2) (GP) Limited

Respondent/landlord/claimant

UK OM (LP2) Limited

Respondent/landlord/claimant

The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (York) General Partner Limited

Respondent/landlord/claimant

UK OM (LP3) (GP) Limited

Respondent/landlord/claimant

UK (OM) (LP3) Limited

Respondent/landlord/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal; Application to Vacate Hearing Due to Automatic Stay Under PD 51 Z and 2020 Rules

  1. 1 Does the automatic stay imposed by Practice Direction 51Z apply to these appeals?
  2. 2 If the stay applies only to part of the appeals, should the hearing proceed?
  3. 3 Should the stay be lifted in whole or in part?

Ratio Decidendi

The automatic stay imposed by PD 51Z and the 2020 Rules applies to both appeals because the proceedings, by virtue of counterclaims and consent orders for possession, became proceedings for possession brought under CPR Part 55. The stay is blanket in nature and cannot be circumvented by technical distinctions between claims and counterclaims or by the form of pleadings. The hearing of the appeal is vacated and can only proceed after the stay ends or if the parties agree under the exceptions in PD 51Z.

Court Disposition

Appeal hearing vacated due to automatic stay under PD 51Z and the 2020 Rules.

Orders

  • Hearing of the appeal is vacated.
  • Appeal may be re-listed after the stay ends or by agreement under PD 51Z paragraph 2A(c).