Baqir Al-Chaalan & Another v Abri Group Limited [2026] EWCA Civ 946
Jennifer Moate, appearing on behalf of Abri Group Limited, was successful in resisting the appeal brought by Mr Al-Chaalan against the dismissal of his application to set aside a possession order.
The appeal raised important issues concerning service of possession proceedings under the Civil Procedure Rules. The appellant argued that the proceedings had not been validly served and challenged the lower courts’ findings that he was aware of the possession hearing and had failed to act promptly in seeking to set aside the possession order. He further contended that the respondent’s conduct justified setting aside the order.
The Court of Appeal (Newey, Asplin and Baker LJJ) unanimously dismissed the appeal. Giving the lead judgment, Lady Justice Asplin accepted the respondent’s submissions that the tenancy agreement’s provision permitting service of “any legal notice, or any other communication arising from the Agreement” at the property was sufficiently broad to encompass the service of possession proceedings and therefore satisfied CPR 6.8(a). The Court also upheld the findings made below that the appellant was aware of the proceedings and confirmed that the judges had been entitled to draw the relevant inferences from the evidence on a paper application.
The Court further rejected the argument that Abri’s conduct warranted the exceptional exercise of the court’s powers to set aside the possession order, holding that while certain aspects of the conduct were “regrettable”, they were not “egregious” and did not justify disturbing the order.
The judgment provides valuable guidance on contractual service provisions in tenancy agreements, the interaction between such provisions and CPR 6.8, and the approach to applications to set aside possession orders by analogy with CPR 39.3(5). It will be of particular interest to registered providers, local authorities and housing practitioners dealing with possession proceedings and questions of service.