Paratus AMC Ltd v Fosuhene
There was no evidence that Paratus knew the payments were from the occupier or had consented to or recognised Ms Fosuhene as tenant. Without such knowledge or conduct, the tenancy was not binding on Paratus, and Ms Fosuhene had no defence to the possession claim.
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: Paratus AMC Limited; Second Defendant/appellant: Doe Fosuhene
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 11 July 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Mortgagee Rights, Tenancy Created in Breach of Mortgage, Waiver and Estoppel, Possession Proceedings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Paratus AMC Limited
Claimant/respondent
Doe Fosuhene
Second Defendant/appellant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Paratus AMC Limited, as mortgagee, had expressly or impliedly consented to or was estopped from denying Ms Fosuhene's tenancy
- 2 Whether Ms Fosuhene had an equitable right to remain in the property on the terms of her lease
- 3 Whether the lower courts erred in deciding disputed questions of fact summarily
Ratio Decidendi
There was no evidence that Paratus knew the payments were from the occupier or had consented to or recognised Ms Fosuhene as tenant. Without such knowledge or conduct, the tenancy was not binding on Paratus, and Ms Fosuhene had no defence to the possession claim.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- permission to enforce possession orders granted
- costs of the appeal awarded to respondent, assessed at £10,000
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