Supreme Court rejects gas safety certificate appeal request

Supreme Court rejects gas safety certificate appeal request

10:24 AM, 14th April 2022, About a month ago 3

Text Size

The tenants in the Recarrell v Rouncefield case, who lost their appeal at the High Court, have now had their bid to have the case heard at the Supreme Court declined on the basis that it was not a point of general public importance.

The case won by the landlord was a landmark decision confirming even if a gas safety certificate was not provided at the very start of the tenancy it did not preclude a landlord from ever gaining possession or eviction at any point in the future as long a certificate was provided at a later date.

Sarah Cummins, senior associate solicitor at Anthony Gold, said: “The Court’s decision will be welcomed by private sector landlords who feared that a failure to provide the gas safety certificate before occupation permanently prevented them from recovering possession of their properties,”

“It has been nearly two years since the Court of Appeal’s judgment and the Supreme Court’s decision to refuse to hear the tenant’s appeal now brings some certainty to this difficult area of law.

“There is no requirement for the Supreme Court to explain its reasons, but it may be that the promised abolition of section 21 notices played some role in the court’s decision to refuse permission to appeal.”



Comments

by Luke P

10:35 AM, 14th April 2022, About a month ago

Well a sensible decision, I'd say. You can't have an error (for that's what it could amount to...you could in fact have a GSC, even furnished the tenant with a copy, but failed to gain proof of such to counter a tenant that may have either forgotten they were given it, or chose to tell untruths) preventing you from EVER gaining possession - not only is that madness, but it's a situation not proportionate to the 'crime'.

by Mohammed Kadir

10:38 AM, 14th April 2022, About a month ago

This ruling makes sense. While I completely agree that gas safety checks must be conducted and certificates provided, I would also argue that the lack of a gas safety certificate should have no relevance to the repossession or eviction process. How does it have any material impact on the tenants right to remain in the property? If the property was unsafe, why would a tenant want to remain in it? It would make sense the other way round; if the tenant wanted to leave the property EARLIER than the termination date due to the landlords failure to provide a gas safety certificate.

by Mick Roberts

8:17 AM, 16th April 2022, About a month ago

Well said u two above, here's my words on it:

Done slightly wrong and u can't get bad non paying tenant out which then wrecks it for the good tenants.
U MUST have gave the tenant boiler certificate Judge says or u not getting her out even though she owes 2 years rent.
But Judge, I've put a new boiler in since then, so it's irrelevant.
Judge says Not bothered, this retrospective Anti-Landlord law is now in and bad tenant is never leaving


Leave Comments

Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.

Forgotten your password?

BECOME A MEMBER

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now