header-logo header-logo

Nothing going on but the rent

11 June 2009 / James Driscoll
Issue: 7373 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

When is it reasonable to make a possession order? asks James Driscoll

In order to recover possession against a tenant with security of tenure, it is a fundamental principle that the ground for possession must be proved and also, crucially, that it is reasonable to make an order. This was established by the Rent Acts and continued by later housing legislation.

Under the Rent Act 1977 (RA 1977), a landlord can only recover possession against a tenant if the tenant is provided with suitable alternative accommodation, or if one of what are sometimes described as the discretionary grounds for possession set out in RA 1977, Sch 15, such as rent arrears, is proved.

In either case it must be reasonable to make an order for possession. There are also a number of mandatory grounds where possession must be ordered if the relevant ground is made out (Sch 15, Pt 2).

Similarly, under the Housing Act 1985 (HA 1985) a court can only order possession against a secure tenant where a specific

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll