Application for possession order under RSC Order 113–Summary proceedings for possession of land–Company claiming against former manager of one of their public houses–Manager’s attempts to find alternative housing for his family had failed–Eviction order needed to enable local authority to rehouse him–Possession order made–Judge’s comments about the effect of his order in relation to housing priorities
In this short
cause, Chef & Brewer Ltd applied under Rules of the Supreme Court, Order
113, for possession of living quarters over one of their public houses in High
Street, Milton, Notts. The former manager, Laurence Clarke, had been given two
months’ notice terminating his employment, but he and his family had been
unable to find other accommodation and had not moved out. The premises were
urgently needed to house the new manager, who was living in a caravanette in
the public house’s car park. The local authority, Daventry Council, had said
they could not give the family priority on their housing list unless they were
made homeless by a formal court order.
Alastair
Norris (instructed by Bower Cotton & Bower, agents for Beck & Phipps,
of Northampton) represented the plaintiffs; Mr and Mrs Laurence Clarke appeared
in person.
Giving
judgment, BRIGHTMAN J said he would make the usual possession order but wished
to make it clear that he was not seeking to give any priority to the Clarkes in
their local authority housing queue.
The judge
asked the plaintiffs’ instructing solicitors to write a letter to the local
authority to the effect that the order for possession which he had made was
intended to be without prejudice to the question whether the effect of his
order was or was not to invoke any statutory or other obligation on the local
authority to rehouse the defendants and that the question of rehousing which
had been expressly raised in the evidence remained, so far as he was concerned,
wholly in the discretion of the local authority.
