Hertfordshire County Council v Davies

Hertfordshire County Council v Davies

Although there were procedural defects in failing to disclose the pending appeal and not giving adequate notice prior to the application for permission to issue the writ, these defects were cured by subsequent correspondence and the lapse of the appeal. The defendant and his family had sufficient notice and opportunity to seek relief. There was no substantive basis for a stay based on the public sector equality duty. The writ of possession was validly issued under CPR 3.10 despite the defaults.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Hertfordshire County Council; Defendant/applicant: Bryn Davies
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Possession Proceedings / Application to Set Aside Writ of Possession and Reinstate Defendant
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Possession Orders, Writ of Possession, Notice Requirements, Public Sector Equality Duty, Stay of Execution
Civil Procedure Land Law Public Law Possession Orders Writ of Possession Notice Requirements Public Sector Equality Duty Stay of Execution

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hertfordshire County Council

Claimant/respondent

Bryn Davies

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Possession Proceedings / Application to Set Aside Writ of Possession and Reinstate Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the writ of possession and permission to issue should be set aside due to lack of notice and non-disclosure of pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether the claimant complied with notice requirements under CPR 83.13(8)
  3. 3 Whether public sector equality duty required a stay of enforcement

Ratio Decidendi

Although there were procedural defects in failing to disclose the pending appeal and not giving adequate notice prior to the application for permission to issue the writ, these defects were cured by subsequent correspondence and the lapse of the appeal. The defendant and his family had sufficient notice and opportunity to seek relief. There was no substantive basis for a stay based on the public sector equality duty. The writ of possession was validly issued under CPR 3.10 despite the defaults.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to issue and the writ of possession are not set aside
  • Order under CPR 3.10 that the writ of possession was validly issued despite defaults