More results...

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Assured Shorthold tenancy
Benefits and care
Housing Conditions
Housing law - All
Introductory and Demoted tenancies
Leasehold and shared ownership
Licences and occupiers
Mortgage possession
Regulation and planning
Trusts and Estoppel
Unlawful eviction and harassment

Do it yourself


A strong argument for not pursuing a case as a litigant in person can be found in this case. That said, hats off to the applicant for at least getting a Judicial Review hearing in person. Not least after turning up two hours late.

There is an indication that the applicant was represented at some point in the process, but it appears that she abandoned representation in order to maintain “I didn’t do it”, despite the neighbours’ statements, the Environmental Health Officer’s statement, the Noise Abatement Order, the Magistrates’ Court conviction for breach of that order, the Crown Court conviction on appeal, and the findings of the review panel meetings that the applicant failed to attend. So, she faces a mandatory possession order on her introductory tenancy.

Who says the litigant in person isn’t given a fair chance in the legal system? It looks to me like the civil courts at various levels have bent over backwards to ensure that this LiP had every chance, and in the end even took the excuse of a left-over funding certificate, (which should technically have been discharged long before, and possibly was), to avoid landing costs on the applicant.

Giles Peaker is a solicitor and partner in the Housing and Public Law team at Anthony Gold Solicitors in South London. You can find him on Linkedin and on Twitter. Known as NL round these parts.


Leave a Reply (We can't offer advice on individual issues)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.