000			02004cad a22002415a 4500
001			L147057
008			090327e20081125xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u147057
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aAdmiral Taverns (Cygnet) Ltd v Tracy Daly & Anor _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2009
520			_a[2008] EWCA Civ 1501, 25 November 2008. The case concerned whether an appeal court has the power to postpone a possession order beyond the limits set by the Housing Act 1980. An appellant head lessee (C) appealed against a decision setting aside a possession order given to the respondents (D) lifting a stay of execution on the order on the basis that the Housing Act 1980 S89(1) did not apply to the court issuing the order. The county court had granted an order of possession and issued a warrant to the landlord. The respondent caretakers, whose license had been terminated, applied to appeal an immediate order for possession and were granted a stay pending the determination of an application for leave to appeal. The case turned around whether the appeal courts had an inherent jurisdiction to suspend possession orders. Held: appeal dismissed. An appellate court retains its inherent jurisdiction to stay an order pending an appeal. The wording of the Housing Act did not place any restriction on that jurisdiction. Boyland and Son v Rand applied. Applications to the court should arrive promptly and it was in the public interest that appeals were expedited.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aBOYLAND AND SON LTD V RAND
650	2	4	_aBAIN AND CO V CHURCH COMMISSIONERS FOR ENGLAND
650	2	4	_aHACKNEY LBC V SIDE BY SIDE (KIDS) LTD
650	2	4	_aHOUSING ACT 1980 S89(1)
650	2	4	_aADMIRAL TAVERNS (CYGNET) LTD V TRACY DALY & ANOR
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/1501.html _zView the report at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c81367 _d81367