Lee v Lasrado

Lee v Lasrado

The appellant was found to be the landlord based on overwhelming evidence, and the late-raised defence was not credible. The hearing was not procedurally unfair, the appellant had opportunity to respond, and the damages awarded were within appropriate ranges. No serious procedural irregularity or injustice was established to warrant overturning the lower court's decision.

Parties
Respondent/claimant: Donna Lee; Appellant/defendant: Adrian Lasrado
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Eviction, Damages, Harassment, Landlord Identity, Procedural Fairness
Landlord and Tenant Law Civil Procedure Eviction Damages Harassment Landlord Identity Procedural Fairness

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donna Lee

Respondent/claimant

Adrian Lasrado

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was the landlord and liable for damages
  2. 2 Whether the hearing was conducted unfairly denying the appellant a chance to present his defence
  3. 3 Whether the award of damages was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was found to be the landlord based on overwhelming evidence, and the late-raised defence was not credible. The hearing was not procedurally unfair, the appellant had opportunity to respond, and the damages awarded were within appropriate ranges. No serious procedural irregularity or injustice was established to warrant overturning the lower court's decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; lower court orders upheld