Brar & Anor v Thirunavukkrasu [2019] EWCA Civ 2032 (03 December 2019)

Brar & Anor v Thirunavukkrasu [2019] EWCA Civ 2032 (03 December 2019)

The exercise of CRAR by the lessors, with knowledge of rent arrears, was an unequivocal act affirming the continuation of the lease and thus waived the right to forfeit for those arrears. The absence of notice of enforcement did not alter the objective effect of the lessors' actions. Section 210 of the 1852 Act did not apply as no possession proceedings were commenced. The purported forfeiture was unlawful.

Citation
[2019] EWCA Civ 2032
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Baljit Singh Brar; Appellant/defendant: Jinder Kaur Brar; Respondent/claimant: Sarvanathan Thirunavukkrasu
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court and County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Forfeiture of Lease, Waiver of Forfeiture, Commercial Rent Arrears Recovery (crar), Distress for Rent, Trespass, Breach of Covenant, Damages
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Civil Procedure Forfeiture of Lease Waiver of Forfeiture Commercial Rent Arrears Recovery (crar) Distress for Rent Trespass +2 more

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Baljit Singh Brar

Appellant/defendant

Jinder Kaur Brar

Appellant/defendant

Sarvanathan Thirunavukkrasu

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court and County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether exercise of CRAR by lessor waives right to forfeit lease for rent arrears
  2. 2 Whether failure to serve notice of enforcement under CRAR affects waiver
  3. 3 Whether section 210 of the Common Law Procedure Act 1852 prevents waiver by CRAR

Ratio Decidendi

The exercise of CRAR by the lessors, with knowledge of rent arrears, was an unequivocal act affirming the continuation of the lease and thus waived the right to forfeit for those arrears. The absence of notice of enforcement did not alter the objective effect of the lessors' actions. Section 210 of the 1852 Act did not apply as no possession proceedings were commenced. The purported forfeiture was unlawful.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration that the purported forfeiture of 12 February 2016 was unlawful stands
  • Damages for trespass and breach of covenant to be assessed against the appellants