Reigate & Banstead District Council v Benfield & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 1009 (27 June 2001)

Reigate & Banstead District Council v Benfield & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 1009 (27 June 2001)

The application to amend the grounds of appeal to include a declaration of incompatibility with Convention rights is refused because the defence was not raised in the county court, would require evidence not gathered, and allowing it now would be procedurally unfair and prejudicial to the respondent. Amendments relating to other undisputed matters are allowed.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1009
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Reigate & Banstead District Council; Defendant/appellant: Rebecca Benfield; Defendant/appellant: Penelope Forrest
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application to Amend Grounds of Appeal
Outcome
Application partly allowed and partly refused
Legal Topics
Introductory Tenancy Regime, Article 14 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Amendment of Grounds of Appeal, Procedural Fairness
Housing Law Human Rights Law Civil Procedure Introductory Tenancy Regime Article 14 ECHR Article 8 ECHR Amendment of Grounds of Appeal 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reigate & Banstead District Council

Claimant/respondent

Rebecca Benfield

Defendant/appellant

Penelope Forrest

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application to Amend Grounds of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant can amend the grounds of appeal to seek a declaration that the respondent's decision to operate an introductory tenancy regime was incompatible with Convention rights and therefore unlawful
  2. 2 Whether such a defence was available and properly raised in the county court
  3. 3 Whether it is procedurally fair to allow the amendment at this stage

Ratio Decidendi

The application to amend the grounds of appeal to include a declaration of incompatibility with Convention rights is refused because the defence was not raised in the county court, would require evidence not gathered, and allowing it now would be procedurally unfair and prejudicial to the respondent. Amendments relating to other undisputed matters are allowed.

Court Disposition

Application partly allowed and partly refused

Orders

  • Amendment to grounds of appeal allowed in respect of undisputed matters
  • Application to amend to seek declaration of incompatibility with Convention rights refused