North Hertfordshire District Council v Carthy & Anor

The recorder erred by not considering whether it was reasonable to make a possession order and by wrongly concluding that the false representation did not induce the council to grant the tenancy. The appeal is allowed and the issue of reasonableness is remitted for determination by a different judge.

Parties: Claimant/appellant: North Hertfordshire District Council; Defendant/respondent: Malcolm Carthy; Defendant/respondent: Maria Elena Carthy
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 17 January 2003
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome: appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Possession Proceedings, False Statement, Homelessness, Reasonableness of Eviction

Housing Law Civil Procedure Possession Proceedings False Statement Homelessness Reasonableness of Eviction

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

North Hertfordshire District Council

Claimant/appellant

Malcolm Carthy

Defendant/respondent

Maria Elena Carthy

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the defendants made a false statement or failed to correct a continuing representation to the council regarding their housing status
2 Whether the false statement induced the council to grant a secure tenancy
3 Whether it is reasonable to make a possession order against the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

Issue of reasonableness remitted to a different court in Hertfordshire for determination
No order for costs here or below