The High Court dismissed Reynaldo Blanco and Virulyn Avellansosa’s appeal against a decision that a notice of termination served by their landlord was valid, but directed them to leave the property by 25 June 2021.
In a ruling on costs delivered electronically on 23 April 2021, Mr Justice Barr said the court had jurisdiction to give the appellants additional time to vacate. He said the interests of children with special needs were engaged and that the court could make an order necessary to protect those interests.
The appellants had asked to remain until the end of the school year. Their submissions said they had four children, aged between six and 17, three of whom had special needs and attended mainstream and special schools reasonably close to their home. The court was also told that the first appellant, a healthcare assistant, had reduced his work hours to care for his wife and children. His wife was recovering from cancer, remained on maintenance treatment and had Type 1 diabetes, the ruling said.
The court was informed that the family was number 19 on the housing list but needed a four-bedroom house and did not expect an offer soon. The judge said he assumed the notice party had given a written undertaking, similar to one in a related appeal, allowing 28 days from perfection of the order to leave. The final order, however, directs the appellants to vacate by 25 June.
The court refused the appellants’ request for their costs. It was not satisfied that the appeal raised issues of general public importance that would bring it within the general provision for public interest litigation. It ordered each party to bear their own costs.
The ruling records that the underlying appeal was brought under section 123 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004, as amended, against a Residential Tenancies Tribunal decision. The final order also requires the parties to file their written submissions in the Central Office within four weeks, in compliance with Practice Direction HC 101.