Not every breach of a social housing tenancy agreement justifies eviction. The High Court made that point in reprieving a mentally ill tenant who had been convicted of harassment and faced 150 separate allegations of causing a noise nuisance to her downstairs neighbour.
The allegations primarily concerned the tenant banging on the floor, slamming doors and shouting and swearing in her flat. She admitted some of them but denied others. After her social landlord launched possession proceedings under the Housing Act 1988, a judge found that she had breached her tenancy agreement.
In refusing to make a possession order, however, the judge noted that she was undergoing treatment for her mental health difficulties and found that the neighbour’s complaints had in part arisen from poor sound insulation between flats. The sounds of everyday life were audible between floors and much of her behaviour was triggered by noise emanating from downstairs. The neighbour was mistaken in his belief that she had targeted him on racial grounds.
In challenging that decision, the landlord argued that there was clearly a risk of further breaches and that the judge had taken insufficient account of the nuisance and annoyance her neighbour had endured. In previous criminal proceedings arising out of her anti-social behaviour at the premises, the tenant had been found guilty of harassment by magistrates.
In dismissing the landlord’s appeal, however, the Court noted that, despite her conviction and the risk of further disturbances, the judge had a discretion not to order possession. He correctly understood and applied the law and was entitled to find on the particular facts of the case that her eviction would be disproportionate.