Edinburgh Council v. HT

This is a summary cause action for recovery of possession of property. The action was defended. The pursuers were represented by Miss Browne, Solicitor, and the defender was represented by Mr Knight, Solicitor. The pursuers owned the property which was let under a missive of let entered into in accordance with Part III of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987, and parties were agreed that for the purposes of these proceedings, matters were regulated by the Housing (Scotland) Act 2001, the lease now being treated as a Scottish Secure Tenancy, per section 11 of that Statute.

It was not disputed that the requisite Notices had been served in accordance with the procedure under the 2001 Act.

There was a dispute between parties as to whether the individual conditions of the missive of let had all been breached; although there was no formal concession as to whether anti-social conduct had been established, the main thrust of the defence was to the effect that, even if such conduct had otherwise been established, the requirements of the two "reasonableness" tests had not been met, and accordingly the pursuers were not entitled to the remedy sought.

The pursuers' witnesses I regarded as credible, and in general terms, reliable. I was however of the view that it had not been established that, truly, both RT and JT, children of the defender, resided at the defender's address. I was unable to hold that the defender was entirely credible and reliable although I accepted that he had taken certain steps in support of his son's educational needs.

The pursuers are the landlords of property occupied by the defender under a missive of let dated 3 March 1993 (Production No 1). Said property is also occupied by the defender's son, HT and on occasions by CT.