Medina Housing Association v Case

A contractual injunction is a remedy for preventing future breaches of the contract. It cannot create rights after the contract has ended unless an independent claim in tort or another proper legal basis exists. In a tenancy case, the injunction may protect against future breaches only until the possession order takes effect. A housing association cannot obtain a wider injunction merely because the conduct affected neighbouring tenants. Section 152(1) of the Housing Act 1996 gives a specific power to a local authority and supplies no wider power for the association.

Medina Housing Association sought possession of premises let to Katrina Case under an assured tenancy, together with an injunction based on an anti-social behaviour term in the tenancy agreement. The County Court found the term breached and indicated that possession should be ordered. After hearing the appellant on the injunction, the judge granted a five-year order restraining further anti-social conduct in the locality. The appeal concerned whether a contractual injunction could restrain conduct after the tenancy had ended, in the absence of a claim in tort or a statutory power.

Decision

1. Appeal allowed. The injunction was set aside. Lord Justice Kay delivered the judgment and Lord Justice Keene agreed.
2. An injunction based on contract is granted to prevent future breaches of that contract. The court cannot use it to confer rights which the contract does not provide, unless the claimant has a proper independent claim in tort.
3. Once the tenancy ended on the making or effectiveness of the possession order, the respondent’s contractual rights ended with it. The contractual remedy could extend only until possession became effective. It could not restrain post-termination conduct which would no longer constitute a breach of the tenancy agreement.
4. The respondent housing association had no entitlement to an injunction in tort on the facts. The court recognised the concern for other tenants, but that concern could not enlarge the association’s contractual rights. An affected neighbouring tenant might potentially have a tort claim, but that did not assist the respondent.
5. Section 152(1) of the Housing Act 1996 permits an injunction prohibiting anti-social behaviour to be sought by a local authority. Parliament had not created a wider statutory power enabling the respondent housing association to obtain such an order. The common law contractual remedy could not supply that omission.

The respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal, subject to the detailed costs directions recorded in the order.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Appeal from the injunction granted by His Honour Judge Thompson QC on 17 October 2002 allowed. The injunction was set aside.
2. Newport Isle of Wight County Court: Found a breach of the tenancy term and granted a five-year injunction restraining anti-social conduct.