header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
12 June 2014 / Robin Denford
Issue: 7611 / Categories: Opinion , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

Right to reply: Mind the gap

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Robin Denford raises questions over the removal of the power to restrain a breach of tenancy injunction

I read with interest the article by Kirsty Varley in NLJ (“Mind the gap”, NLJ, 23 May 2014, p 11). 

With the greatest of respect to Ms Varley, I do not see that the removal of the power to restrain a breach of tenancy injunction is a significant loss with the re-enactment of tools and powers formerly contained within the Housing Act 1996 (HA 1996). 

Council experience

Since the 1996 legislation was created, my authority has successfully sought many hundreds of anti-social behaviour injunctions under s 153 of HA 1996. In very few cases has the use of s 153D been a significant part of the relief sought. 

My council’s own tenancy conditions do make the tenant responsible for the acts of his visitors. It is however, very rarely the case that the tenant is a passive actor. Conduct which is in breach of tenancy conditions which is serious enough

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026—the winners!
The winners of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026 have now been announced, marking another outstanding celebration of excellence, innovation, and impact across the legal profession
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll