[2008] UKHL 70, 10 December 2008. Where it was found that an assured tenancy that was subject to a suspended possession order did not end until possession was given up. When making a suspended possession order, the court could direct that an order could be discharged once its terms had been complied with (even if they had not been strictly complied with). A tenanted made subject to such an order who had served notice to the right to buy under the 1985 Act would have the right to buy revived if the order was later discharged. In joined appeals against three prior decisions, it fell to the court to determine how suspended possession status effected secure and assured tenants. Held: Assured tenancies subject to such an order did not come to an end until possession was surrendered. If the decision in the first appeal stood, it would potentially create thousands of tolerated trespassers, which would create further problems (as the status of tolerated trespassers is a grey area of law). The court could order a possession order discharged even if the terms had not been strictly complied with (where all arrears and costs had been paid) and it also found that the right to buy would be revived after said orders were discharged. The appeals of White and Porter were granted, while that of Islington LBC was dismissed.