This was confirmed by the CA in a case involving an assured T who fell into rent arrears, and then had a suspended possession order made against her (ie enforcement suspended on terms that she pay a weekly sum off the rent arrears in addition to the current rent). Shortly afterwards, T exercised a right to buy (which had arisen under a previous L). L was able to argue that T had lost the right to buy, because the effect of the suspended order was to make her a tolerated trespasser. The CA took the view that the possession order had a fundamental effect on her right to exclusive possession (which is the essence of any tenancy) because that right had now become conditional. Thus, her tenancy terminated when the suspended possession order was made and she was thereafter a tolerated trespasser.

The problem of suspended possession orders has previously been addressed by the CA in the context of secure Ts (Bristol [2006]). Accordingly the CA has now made similar exhortations in respect of assured Ts, and urged that such suspended orders should provide for the giving up of possession, but with a postponement of the date of delivery until a date to be fixed (so as to avoid ceasing to be a T). White v Knowsley [2007] EWCA Civ 404;[2007] NLJ 1503. © Practical Lawyer