London Borough Of Hackney v Amadi & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 850 (21 May 2001)

London Borough Of Hackney v Amadi & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 850 (21 May 2001)

The judge correctly refused permission to file a counterclaim as it was made too late without a draft pleading and would have delayed proceedings. The alleged licence from Councillor Lawless was not a legal grant of a licence, nor was there evidence of authority. The correspondence in 1995 did not amount to a binding agreement to grant a tenancy as essential terms were not agreed and no acceptance was established.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 850
Parties
Claimant/respondent: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hackney; Defendant/applicant: Innocent Amadi; Defendant/applicant: Stella Anuforo
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Possession Proceedings, Counterclaim Procedure, Licence to Occupy, Contract Formation, Authority of Council Officers
Landlord and Tenant Civil Procedure Possession Proceedings Counterclaim Procedure Licence to Occupy Contract Formation Authority of Council Officers

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hackney

Claimant/respondent

Innocent Amadi

Defendant/applicant

Stella Anuforo

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in refusing permission to file a counterclaim at trial
  2. 2 Whether the defendants were in lawful occupation by virtue of a licence allegedly granted by a councillor
  3. 3 Whether there was a binding agreement to grant a tenancy to the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The judge correctly refused permission to file a counterclaim as it was made too late without a draft pleading and would have delayed proceedings. The alleged licence from Councillor Lawless was not a legal grant of a licence, nor was there evidence of authority. The correspondence in 1995 did not amount to a binding agreement to grant a tenancy as essential terms were not agreed and no acceptance was established.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • Application for stay refused