[2006] EWCA Civ 156, 28 February 2006. Concerns whether the Insolvency Act 1986 s285 (3) precluded the enforcement of a possession order because it was a remedy against the property in respect of the arrears of rent and costs. Appeal by HL against a decision refusing to discharge a possession order obtained by HR for non-payment of rent. The possession order against HL would not be enforced if HL paid the arrears of rent and continued occupation costs by the agreed date. H however had a bankruptcy order made upon his own petition and sought discharge of the possession order but the judge found that HR was not seeking to enforce a remedy against HL's property. HL claimed that the liability for arrears and costs were debts provable in his bankruptcy, the right to seek a postponement of the date of possession under the Housing Act 1985 s 85(2) or to discharge it altogether under s85(4) was itself property for the purposes of s436 of the 1986 Act and that the continued existence of the possession order was a remedy against his property and was so precluded by s 285(3) of the Act. "Held": appeal dismissed. The maintenance of a suspended possession order under the Housing Act 1985 s85(2) did not constitute a remedy against a former tenant's property that was precluded by s285 (3) of the 1986 Act.