Housing Law Case Digest
Cases are arranged chronologically by year and alphabetically by Pursuer/Appellant within each year. A full citation is given where the case is reported, followed by a brief synopsis of the decision. This is by no means an exhaustive list and will grow with time as further relevant cases are added, both new and old. It should be noted that not all cases are definitive. English decisions are not binding on Scottish courts but may be persuasive. Decisions taken by Sheriff Courts at first instance (as opposed to on appeal) are not binding but may be persuasive. Decisions taken by Sheriffs Principal are binding within their own Sheriffdoms but only persuasive in other Sheriffdoms. Decisions taken by the Court of Session are binding on Sheriff Courts in all Sheriffdoms. Accordingly, it may be seen that some decisions taken by Sheriff Courts conflict with each other in absence of higher binding authority, e.g. on questions of competence relating to Minutes for Recall of Decree.
Cases with a connection to Renfrewshire Law Centre are marked RLC.
1930's
Kemp v Ballchulish Estate Co 1933 SC 478
Overriding equity test in rent arrears cases.
1940's
Summers v Salford [1943] AC 283
Leading case on definition of reasonably fit for human habitation - the "ordinary user test". This case related to a defective sash window, which alone alone could make a tenancy fail the test. See also Haggerty v Glasgow Corporation, below.
1960's
Haggerty v Glasgow Corporation 1963 SLT (Notes) 73
Looks at the "orinary user test" in a Scots legal context - see also Summers v Salford, above.
1970's
Lamb v Glasgow District Council 1978 SLT (Notes) 64
Application of Occupiers' Liability (Scotland) Act 1960 - visiter to property had epileptic fit and fell on fireplace, burning himself. Action successful on basis of s.3 of the 1960 Act.
1980's
Renfrew Distric Council v Gray 1987 SLT (Sh.Ct.) 70
Looks at distinction in disrepair cases between, on one hand, withholding rent as not lawfully due and, on the other hand, abatement of rent.
Little v City of Glasgow District Council 1988 SCLR 482
Example of quanitification of compensation for disrepair - £520 for loss of washing facilities for 9 months.
McArdle v City of Glasgow District Council 1989 SCLR 19
Example of quanitification of compensation for disrepair - £750 for 5 years of inconvenience caused by disrepair.
1990's
Midlothian DC v Brown 1991 SLT (Sh.Ct.) 80
Prejudice to landlord test in rent arrears cases.
R v Wandsworth LBC ex parte Hawthorn, 1995 2 All ER 331
Not reasonable to evict tenant who had spent rent money on children’s genuine needs.
Cheltenham & Gloucester Building Society v Norgan [1996] All ER 449
Mortgage arrears may be spread over whole remaining term of mortgage.
Quinn v Monklands District Council 1996 HousLR 86
Example of quanitification of compensation for disrepair - £800 for one year of inconvenience caused by disrepair.
Retail Parks Investments Ltd v Royal Bank of Scotland plc (No 2) 1996 SLT 669
Looks at specific implement in disrepair cases.
Burns v Monklands District Council 1997 HousLR 34
Example of quanitification of compensation for disrepair - £500 for one year of inconvenience caused by disrepair.
D v UK (1997) 24 EHRR 423
Eviction contrary to ECHR where it would deprive householder of access to nearby medical facilities.
Kearney v Monklands District Council 1997 HousLR 39
Example of quanitification of compensation for disrepair - £600 for one year of inconvenience caused by disrepair.
Wallace v Manchester CC 1998 HLR
Example of quanitification of compensation for disrepair in English case - £1,000 for one years of inconvenience caused by disrepair.
Reid Furniture Company ltd v Coll, 1999 SLT (sh ct) 23
Minute for Recall of Decree must be granted when it calls.
2000's
Buchan v North Lanarkshire Council 2000 HousLR 98
Example of quanitification of compensation for disrepair - £700 for one year of inconvenience caused by disrepair.
City of Edinburgh Council v Forbes, 2002 Hous LR, 61
Sheriff may grant decree at first calling, without fixing proof.
North Devon Homes v Brazier [2003] EWHC 574 (QB)
Not reasonable to evict antisocial tenant whose conduct is attributable to mental disability per Disability Discrimination Act and does not constitute risk to neighbours.
City of Edinburgh Council v Porter, 2004 HousLR 46
Qualified occupier may proceed by Minute for Recall of Decree.
N Lanarkshire Council v Kenmuir, 2004 HousLR 50
Qualified occupier may not proceed by Minute for Recall of Decree.
Mack v Glasgow City Council 2006 SLT 556
5-year quinquennial time-bar applies in disrepair cases claiming compensation for inconvenience as opposed to actual personal injury, where 3-year triennial time-bar would apply.
Earle v Charalambous 2007 HLR 8
Example of quanitification of compensation for disrepair in English case - £13,500 for 3 years of inconvenience caused by disrepair. In thie case the rental value was significantly higher than average.
Glasgow Housing Association v Fisher 2008 HousLR 60
Court entitled to be addressed in detail on defence of unreasonable to evict, and may grant decree for eviction in absence of such detail. It is bad practice simply to state a skeletal defence of unreasonable to evict and to seek a period of time to lodge a Supplementary Note of Defence thereafter.
Deans –v- Glasgow Housing Association Ltd, 2009 HousLR
Compensation claim for breach of contract in respect of dampness and disrepair. A defence of contributory negligence would not have been open under contract at common law.
Glasgow Housing Association Ltd –v- DU, Glasgow Sh. Ct. 24 July 2009
Inadequate form of Notice of Proceedings. NPRP merely stated the ground for recovery under Schedule 2 of the 2001 Act, but did not give details as to the basis upon which it was said the ground was established in the case.
Glasgow Housing Association v Duffy 2009
Glasgow Sheriff Court ruled it was competent for a tenant to recall of decree despite having appeared in person and being represented at previous diets, and despite having stated a defence, with a proof and a pre-proof hearing having been assigned.
The tenant's solicitors withdrew from acting before the pre-proof hearing, and the tenant failed to appear in person, whereupon the landlords obtained decree for payment and ejection.
The court held that the pre-proof hearing was truly a continued diet, that decree had been granted under summary cause rule 8.2(5), and that rule 8.2(5) was not restrictive and did not limit the power to grant decree on the calling date as opposed to a continuation of that hearing. It followed that the minute for recall was competent since summary cause rule 24.1(1) permits recall of decree granted under rule 8.2(5).
Glasgow Housing Association Ltd –v- Heatherington, 2009 HousLR 28
Antisocial behaviour case. On tenant's application, the case was adjourned for six months subject to the condition that she tenant adhere to the terms of her tenancy agreement. The effect of the adjournment was to give her the opportunity to show she could conduct herself appropriately, therefore it would not be reasonable to evict.
Renfrewshire Council v Wotherspoon, 2009 Unreported, Paisley Sh.Ct.
Competent to grant an interim interdict against repossession under rule 2.31 of the Summary Applications Rules 1999 where abandonment procedure and its appeal process lack an effective remedy for the tenant caught between expiry of the 28-day period yet before service of the second notice.
Click here to link to a more detailed case narrative.
Stirling Council –v- Harris, 11th March 2009
Burden of proof in establishing Anti Social Behaviour Order – beyond reasonable doubt. For an order to be granted adequate steps must be taken by the Pursuer to resolve matters prior to raising proceedings and an order to be imposed must be specific.
Todd –v- Clapperton, 2009 Hous LR 48
Compensation claim failed on facts. However in law liability would have been established as a landlord is taken to have warranted the condition of the property at the commencement of a tenancy and he undertakes to keep it in all respects reasonably fit for human habitation.
2010's
Pinnock -v- Manchester City Council [2010] UKSC 45
Large nine-bench judgment aiming to give clarity to previously conflicting and confusing chain of jurisprudence relating to the applicability of ECHR Art.8 to eviction cases, particularly Qazi -v- Harrow LBC [2003] UKHL 43, Kay -v- Lambeth LBC [2006] UKHL 10 and Dochery -v- Birmingham City Council [2008] UKHL 57. Essentially, the case involved a demoted tenancy (similar to a Short Scottish Secure Tenancy), and the occupier sought to advance an argument under Art.8. Although this was ultimately unsuccessful on the merits, nonetheless the Supreme Court accepted that Art.8 may apply, albeit rarely, in cases where an occupier has no security of tenure or right, title or interest, and he should have the opportunity to make an Art.8 argument at the court of first instance without having to seek Judicial Review.
Hounslow LBC -v- Powell [2011] UKSC 8
Further development of Pinock jurisprudence in a case involving an introductory tenancy.