The High Court dismissed a tenant’s appeal against a Private Residential Tenancies Board (PRTB) determination, finding that his landlord, Strand Trust Limited, was not an approved housing body under the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1992.
The appeal concerned the PRTB’s jurisdiction over a tenancy at 25a Pembroke Gardens, Ballsbridge, where Derek O’Shaughnessy had lived since September 2004. O’Shaughnessy argued that Strand Trust was the same entity as Protestant Aid, a registered charity listed as an approved body, and that the tenancy was therefore outside the Residential Tenancies Act 2004.
The court heard that Protestant Aid and Strand Trust shared premises and a telephone line, had some directors in common and performed similar or overlapping functions. Strand Trust was formed in 1988 as a separate registered charity. Evidence presented to the tenancy tribunal was that it owned properties and provided accommodation to people in urgent need while expecting rent. O’Shaughnessy said he understood the company employing him as a verger to be “one and the same” with Strand Trust.
The tenancy dispute began with applications to the PRTB in June 2013. O’Shaughnessy alleged that the landlord had served an invalid termination notice. The landlord alleged that he was overholding, owed rent, had damaged the premises and had caused it further rental losses. Following an adjudication and then an appeal to the tenancy tribunal, the tribunal found that the parties intended to enter a landlord-tenant relationship and that Strand Trust was not an approved housing body. It upheld the termination notice, directed O’Shaughnessy to leave within seven days and ordered payment of rent arrears.
O’Shaughnessy then asked the High Court to set aside the PRTB determination order. The respondent initially objected that his appeal had been lodged outside the statutory 21-day period, but waived that objection because it was only one day late.
President of the High Court Kearns ruled that Strand Trust and Protestant Aid were distinct entities. Shared administration, contact details, functions and directors did not make them the same body. Strand Trust had not sought approved status, and the court said it could not bypass the statutory procedure for obtaining it. The court also rejected the complaint that the tribunal’s reasons were inadequate.
The High Court found no error by the PRTB and dismissed the appeal. The judgment addressed the landlord’s approved-body status and the PRTB’s jurisdiction; it did not itself make a new order about possession or rent.