Jones v Cleanthi [2006] EWCA Civ 1712
Landlord and tenant; landlord erected wall blocking access to refuse bins; whether statutory obligation defeats easement
Facts
Jones was a tenant of a flat under a long lease. The agreement provided she had by way of easement access to, and the use of refuse bins at the rear of the property. The landlord’s predecessor in title received a s352 notice under the Housing Act 1985 from the local authority requiring he construct a wall to adhere to fire safety regulations. The wall was duly erected but it blocked off Jones’ access to the refuse area, and she sought declaratory and injunctive relief to assert her easement rights.
Issues
Jones argued the s352 notice did not necessarily carry with it a statutory power to comply with its contents when they interfered with her rights as a third party. She contended the landlord could have appealed the notice, or complied with its terms without interfering with her right of access. Even if he was obliged to construct the wall, this would still amount to an actionable breach of contract for which she could claim damages. Cleanthi argued the local authority was empowered to extinguish property rights in the interests of fire safety. A statutory obligation carries with it a statutory power to comply, and the works were strongly in the public interest. There was no actionable interference with a property right of a tenant where a landlord is complying with a statutory duty.
Decision/Outcome
Jones’ claim was unsuccessful. The landlord was under a statutory obligation to erect the wall and it followed that he had the power to do so. In complying with his statutory obligations, he had, therefore, committed no actionable wrong against the tenants, and the statutory notice was a complete defence for the landlord.
Updated 21 March 2026
This article accurately summarises the Court of Appeal’s decision in Jones v Cleanthi [2006] EWCA Civ 1712. The legal principles described — that compliance with a statutory obligation under s.352 of the Housing Act 1985 can constitute a complete defence to a claim for interference with an easement, and that a statutory duty to act carries with it the power to do so — remain good law. There have been no subsequent statutory changes or later appellate decisions that materially affect or overturn this case. The Housing Act 1985 remains in force, though readers should note that housing standards and fire safety legislation has developed considerably since 2006, particularly following the Building Safety Act 2022 and associated regulatory reforms. Those developments do not alter the legal principle established in this case, but practitioners dealing with fire safety obligations in residential leasehold contexts should be aware of the broader and significantly updated legislative landscape now governing building and fire safety.
