Image from Google Jackets

Landlord and tenant - assured shorthold tenancy

Series: Estates Gazette ; [2001] 19 EG 141 (CS) (12/5/01)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: "Poplar Housing & Regeneration Community Association Ltd v Donoghue", CA 27 April 2001. Poplar Housing & Regeneration Community Housing Ltd (A) operated as a registered social landlord on behalf of Tower Hamlets LBC. B had been granted a periodic tenancy by the council, which later decided B was intentionally homeless and transferred her property to A. A sought a possession order, which was granted by the judge. B appealed on the grounds that the order contravened her rights under the European Convention of Human Rights Articles 6 and 8: her rights to respect for both her private and family life and for her home, and to a fair trial. Furthermore, she contended this involved interpreting Housing Act 1988 s21(4) in a way that was incompatible with the HRA. Appeal dismissed. CA decision available on http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/6ff876ba66f8361a8025683c00411386/d4b4124ceb03456480256a40004131b7/$FILE/civil_donoghue.htm?OpenDocument
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London News article WB3719-25 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 112565-1001

"Poplar Housing & Regeneration Community Association Ltd v Donoghue", CA 27 April 2001. Poplar Housing & Regeneration Community Housing Ltd (A) operated as a registered social landlord on behalf of Tower Hamlets LBC. B had been granted a periodic tenancy by the council, which later decided B was intentionally homeless and transferred her property to A. A sought a possession order, which was granted by the judge. B appealed on the grounds that the order contravened her rights under the European Convention of Human Rights Articles 6 and 8: her rights to respect for both her private and family life and for her home, and to a fair trial. Furthermore, she contended this involved interpreting Housing Act 1988 s21(4) in a way that was incompatible with the HRA. Appeal dismissed. CA decision available on http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/6ff876ba66f8361a8025683c00411386/d4b4124ceb03456480256a40004131b7/$FILE/civil_donoghue.htm?OpenDocument