Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza

Question 1

outcome of case

Answer 1

Rent Act 1977 interpreted in order to make it compliant with HRA
Interpreted the Act as applying to those living as if they were husband and wife, rather than as husband and wife in its plain construction.

Question 2

Ratio

Answer 2

judges get wide berth in interpreting cases

Question 3

facts of the case

Answer 3

Landlord (G) attempting to evict a tenant (M) from his property.
M had lived with his partner in the property for 18 years in a stable homosexual relationship. Upon his partner’s death M claimed the tenancy passed to him under Schedule 1 of the Rent Act 1977.
Schedule 1(1) of the Rent Act 1977 provided that a statutory tenancy would pass to either a surviving spouse or to a ‘person who was living with the original tenant as his or her wife or husband’.
M challenged Schedule 1 of the Rent Act on the grounds that it infringed Article 8 in conjunction with Article 14.
Held: In favour of Mr Mendoza.

Question 4

judgement date

Answer 4

2004

Question 5

how many judges

Answer 5

5
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead , Lord Steyn , Lord Millett , Lord Rodger of Earlsferry and Baroness Hale of Richmond
2004 April 20, 21; June 21