Kilby v Basildon District Council [2006] EWHC 1892 (Admin) (26 July 2006)
Clause 11 of the tenancy agreement is void because it unlawfully fetters and attempts to provide for variation of secure tenancies in a manner not permitted by section 102 of the Housing Act 1985, which sets out an exclusive code for such variations. The Council cannot contract out of or delegate its statutory powers in this way.
- Citation
- [2006] EWHC 1892 (Admin)
- Parties
- Claimant: Maurice Kilby; Defendant: Basildon District Council
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 26 July 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for judicial review dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Secure Tenancies, Variation of Tenancy Agreements, Statutory Powers of Local Authorities, Ultra Vires, Fettering of Discretion
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Maurice Kilby
Claimant
Basildon District Council
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether clause 11 of the tenancy agreement unlawfully fetters or delegates the Council's statutory powers under the Housing Act 1985 to vary secure tenancies
- 2 Whether clause 11 is void as ultra vires or contrary to section 102 of the Housing Act 1985
Ratio Decidendi
Clause 11 of the tenancy agreement is void because it unlawfully fetters and attempts to provide for variation of secure tenancies in a manner not permitted by section 102 of the Housing Act 1985, which sets out an exclusive code for such variations. The Council cannot contract out of or delegate its statutory powers in this way.
Court Disposition
Application for judicial review dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment