[2006] EWCA Civ 767, 14 June 2006. Considers the effect of a Tomlin order settling possession proceedings. Appeal by C against a decision refusing its claim for possession of a flat occupied at one time by M who had been in dispute with the original landlord over the state of the premises which were unoccupied and became uninhabitable. C became landlord by assignment and brought proceedings against M claiming arrears of rent and that M's statutory tenancy had terminated because he was not in occupation. The parties agreed in a Tomlin order that once C had completed work on the flat to the satisfaction of an independent expert, M would become liable to pay rent which he refused to do, whereon C sought possession. The judge held that the matter had been settled under the Tomlin order and that it would be an abuse of process for C to contend that M had lost his statutory protection before the date of the order. "Held": appeal dismissed. The Tomlin order settled the issue of M's intention to return to actual occupation once the premises were habitable. There was ample evidence in relation to the period between the date of the Tomlin order and the commencement of the second proceedings that M had retained an intention to return to the property.