Lewis & Anor v Kush Housing Association [2005] EWCA Civ 445 (12 April 2005)

Lewis & Anor v Kush Housing Association [2005] EWCA Civ 445 (12 April 2005)

There were no arguable grounds for interfering with the judge's findings of fact or credibility regarding the disrepair claim or the possession order. The appellant failed to meet the requirements for a second appeal or for admission of new evidence. The findings that rent arrears exceeded the statutory minimum and that the appellant obstructed repairs were justified. The applications for permission to appeal were dismissed as having no real prospect of success.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 445
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Erskine Lewis; Claimant/respondent: Kush Housing Association
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)
Outcome
Applications for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Possession Proceedings, Disrepair Claims, Set Off of Damages, Housing Benefit Arrears, Procedural Fairness, Evidence on Appeal, Human Rights (echr Articles 6, 8, 14)
Landlord and Tenant Housing Law Civil Procedure Possession Proceedings Disrepair Claims Set Off of Damages Housing Benefit Arrears Procedural Fairness +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Erskine Lewis

Defendant/appellant

Kush Housing Association

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lower courts erred in dismissing the disrepair claim and the appeal against the possession order
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was denied procedural fairness or suffered injustice due to procedural irregularities
  3. 3 Whether new evidence should be admitted on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

There were no arguable grounds for interfering with the judge's findings of fact or credibility regarding the disrepair claim or the possession order. The appellant failed to meet the requirements for a second appeal or for admission of new evidence. The findings that rent arrears exceeded the statutory minimum and that the appellant obstructed repairs were justified. The applications for permission to appeal were dismissed as having no real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Applications for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Applications for permission to appeal dismissed
  • Ancillary applications for further orders (including disclosure and stay) dismissed