CA 17 March 1998. In the first case, the sheriff had no written walking possesssion agreement. He broke into the plaintiffs house, removed goods and then installed new locks. The plaintiff appealed against the judges decision not to impose an injunction to restrain the sheriff from selling the goods. In the second case, the bailiff, after entering into a walking possession agreement, forced entry, removed the goods and then installed new locks. The tenants appealed against the county court decision that the forced entry was lawful. "Held" a bailiff or sheriffwas not entitled, after impounding forcibly, to re-enter premises except where he was expelled by force or had been deliberately excluded by the tenant. A locked door was not sufficient to justify a forcible re-entry. Although the forcible re-entry was unlawful in both cases the appeals were dismissed. The sheriff was in lawful possession of the goods and entitled to sell them. The tenants had not proved any recoverable damage.