header-logo header-logo

04 December 2014
Issue: 7634 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Council liable for unlawful eviction

Statutory damages for unlawful eviction are calculated in the same way regardless of whether a public sector or private landlord is involved, the Supreme Court has unanimously held.

The decision, in Loveridge v Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lambeth [2014] UKSC 65, means substantial statutory damages can be awarded against local authorities for unlawful eviction. 

Harry Loveridge was evicted in his absence while on a five-month visit to Ghana, even though he was still paying his rent by standing order. Lambeth Council, fearing he had died, forced entry to the flat, disposed of his possessions and installed a new tenant. He was awarded £90,500 damages plus £9,000 for trespass to his goods.

Michael Paget of Cornerstone Barristers, who acted for Mr Loveridge, the tenant, says: “The Supreme Court has made it clear that the Housing Act 1988 applies to all landlords equally, with a potential heavy penalty when a tenant with significant security of tenure is unlawfully evicted. Trying to regain possession without using the courts may not be worth it.

“This statutory damages dog has an awful bite but there is absolutely no reason at all to get bitten. Where the evicted tenant had significant security then full statutory damages will be significant, but no landlord should end up being subject to a full award. 

“Where a mistake is made by the landlord it should be corrected as quickly as possible. Lawfully enforcing a possession order through the courts is by far the safest way to guarantee vacant possession.”

Statutory damages are calculated by considering the value of the building with the tenant benefiting from security of tenure and without such security of tenure. It is a purely hypothetical process and does not require an actual sale to a willing buyer.

The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal had been wrong to consider what would actually happen after a sale to a willing buyer. The fact that a secure tenancy would be downgraded to an assured tenancy after sale to a private sector buyer was irrelevant. 

 

Issue: 7634 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll