Kerr (Appellant) v Poplar Housing and Regeneration Limited Community (Respondent)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0007

Parties

Appellant(s)

Janet Kerr

Respondent(s)

Poplar Housing And Regeneration Limited Community

Issue

Whether the court has the power to vary a suspended order for possession originally made on a discretionary ground for possession by making an unconditional order on a mandatory ground for possession.

Facts

The Appellant is the tenant of a house in Poplar and the Respondent is her landlord. She lives with her son. After the Appellant failed to pay her rent, the Respondent began possession proceedings against her on the ground of non-payment of rent. This is a discretionary ground for possession; where a landlord relies on this ground, the court may only make an order for possession if it considers it reasonable to do so. On 7 February 2017, DJ Pilgrim made an order for possession requiring the Appellant to give the Respondent possession of the house. This was what is known as a suspended order, as it was not to be enforced so long as the Appellant paid the Respondent the rent owed. On 25 August 2020, a group of men forced their way into the Appellant’s home and threatened violence. The Appellant’s son arrived and in the course of scaring off the intruders he fired an imitation firearm. He was charged with and pleaded guilty to possession of an imitation firearm with intent to cause violence. This offence falls under the definition of a ‘serious offence’ in the Housing Act 1988. In light of this, the Respondent decided to seek possession of the house on the ground of anti-social behaviour. This is a mandatory ground for possession; if the court is satisfied that the tenant or a person residing in or visiting the house has been convicted of a serious offence and certain other conditions are met, the court is obliged to make an order for possession. Notice seeking possession was served on the Appellant in February 2021 and the Respondent applied to the court to request that the existing suspended order be varied into an outright possession order. The application came before DJ Bell on 16 February 2022, who agreed to vary the original order to an outright order. Both of the Appellant’s subsequent appeals were dismissed. The Appellant now appeals to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

15 January 2025

Case origin

PTA

Appeal

Justices

Lord Hodge

Lord Leggatt

Lady Rose

Permission to Appeal

Permission to Appeal decision date

16 June 2025

Permission to Appeal decision

Refused

Back to top