Lowe v Governors of Sutton's Hospital in Charterhouse [2025] EWCA Civ 857 (10 July 2025)

Lowe v Governors of Sutton's Hospital in Charterhouse [2025] EWCA Civ 857 (10 July 2025)

The statutory purpose of the prescribed information regime is fulfilled where a reasonable recipient would understand the information provided, even if there are obvious errors in clause references or the absence of a signed certificate, provided the tenant is given sufficient information about the circumstances in which the deposit may be retained and the landlord's confirmation is authenticated by a signed covering letter.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 857
Parties
Appellant: Mr Merryck Lowe; Respondents: The Governors of Sutton's Hospital in Charterhouse
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Tenancy Deposit Protection, Assured Shorthold Tenancy, Statutory Interpretation, Prescribed Information 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 22 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

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Whether Article 2(1)(g)(vi) of the Housing (Tenancy Deposits) (Prescribed Information) Order 2007 is satisfied by reference to a clause in a tenancy agreement not attached and with incorrect clause numbering
  2. 2 Whether Article 2(1)(g)(vii) is satisfied if a covering letter is signed by the landlord but the enclosed certificate is not signed and the tenant has not had opportunity to confirm accuracy before certification
  3. 3 Whether the Information Ground can be relied upon when not pleaded

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory purpose of the prescribed information regime is fulfilled where a reasonable recipient would understand the information provided, even if there are obvious errors in clause references or the absence of a signed certificate, provided the tenant is given sufficient information about the circumstances in which the deposit may be retained and the landlord's confirmation is authenticated by a signed covering letter.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No breach of prescribed information requirements found
  • No statutory penalty payable by landlord