Merryck Lowe v The Governors of Sutton's Hospital in Charterhouse

Merryck Lowe v The Governors of Sutton's Hospital in Charterhouse

The Court held that reference to a non-existent clause in an unattached tenancy agreement was an obvious error that a reasonable recipient would understand as referring to the correct clause, thus fulfilling the statutory purpose of Article 2(1)(g)(vi). The absence of a landlord's signature on the certificate was remedied by the signed covering letter, and together they were 'substantially to the same effect' as required by section 213(6) of the Housing Act 2004. The tenant was given the opportunity to check the information, satisfying Article 2(1)(g)(vii). The appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Mr Merryck Lowe; Respondents: The Governors of Sutton's Hospital in Charterhouse
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Assured Shorthold Tenancies, Tenancy Deposit Protection, Statutory Interpretation, Procedural Compliance, Certification Requirements
Landlord and Tenant Law Housing Law Assured Shorthold Tenancies Tenancy Deposit Protection Statutory Interpretation Procedural Compliance Certification Requirements

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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Merryck Lowe

Appellant

The Governors of Sutton's Hospital in Charterhouse

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether reference to a non-existent clause in a tenancy agreement and failure to attach the agreement satisfies Article 2(1)(g)(vi) of the Housing (Tenancy Deposits) (Prescribed Information) Order 2007
  2. 2 Whether an unsigned certificate of prescribed information, accompanied by a signed covering letter, satisfies Article 2(1)(g)(vii) of the 2007 Order and section 213(6) of the Housing Act 2004
  3. 3 Whether the Information Ground could be relied upon despite not being pleaded

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that reference to a non-existent clause in an unattached tenancy agreement was an obvious error that a reasonable recipient would understand as referring to the correct clause, thus fulfilling the statutory purpose of Article 2(1)(g)(vi). The absence of a landlord's signature on the certificate was remedied by the signed covering letter, and together they were 'substantially to the same effect' as required by section 213(6) of the Housing Act 2004. The tenant was given the opportunity to check the information, satisfying Article 2(1)(g)(vii). The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No order for payment of statutory penalty under section 214 of the Housing Act 2004.