Harlow District Council v Hall [2006] EWCA Civ 156 (28 February 2006)

Harlow District Council v Hall [2006] EWCA Civ 156 (28 February 2006)

The secure tenancy ended on 9th February 2005, before the bankruptcy order was made. The Possession Order was not a remedy against the property of Mr Hall in respect of provable debts under s.285(3) Insolvency Act 1986. The right to apply for postponement or discharge of the Possession Order is not property against which the order operates as a remedy. The appeal fails.

Citation
[2006] EWCA Civ 156
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Harlow District Council; Appellant/defendant: Norman John Hall
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Secure Tenancy Termination, Bankruptcy Effect on Possession Orders, Remedies Against Property in Bankruptcy
Housing Law Bankruptcy Law Secure Tenancy Termination Bankruptcy Effect on Possession Orders Remedies Against Property in Bankruptcy

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harlow District Council

Respondent/claimant

Norman John Hall

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a possession order for a secure tenancy constitutes a remedy against the property of a bankrupt under s.285(3) Insolvency Act 1986
  2. 2 Whether the secure tenancy terminated before the bankruptcy order was made
  3. 3 Whether the right to apply for postponement or discharge of a possession order is 'property' for bankruptcy purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The secure tenancy ended on 9th February 2005, before the bankruptcy order was made. The Possession Order was not a remedy against the property of Mr Hall in respect of provable debts under s.285(3) Insolvency Act 1986. The right to apply for postponement or discharge of the Possession Order is not property against which the order operates as a remedy. The appeal fails.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; Possession Order stands as varied; no change to underlying enforcement or tenancy status