6. Court Action and Repossession
6.1 Once a case has been received by the court, the court will identify which cases the landlord wants the streamlined eviction process to apply to from the details of the grounds for repossession given in the statement of claim section of the court writ. The landlord can however choose to raise proceedings on more than one ground, if they wish to do so. There are no changes to the procedure up to the point when the case calls in court (see 6.3).
6.2 What evidence landlords submit to the court for cases where proceedings are being raised under the streamlined eviction process is a decision for them. Where an appropriate extract conviction has been obtained, this should however be included. There is no requirement at this stage for landlords to supply the court with any other specific evidence. Landlords may, however, have to give further evidence during court action (see 6.5).
6.3 The streamlined eviction process removes the ability of the court to consider whether it is reasonable to grant an eviction order. The court must grant an eviction order where it is satisfied that:
- the landlord has a ground for recovery of possession set out in paragraph 2 of schedule 2 to the 2001 Act; and
- the notice of proceedings was served on the tenant before the first anniversary of either, the date of the conviction, or where that conviction was appealed, the date on which the appeal was dismissed or abandoned.
6.4 In cases where the court is not satisfied that the criteria for streamlined eviction is satisfied, the court will then consider any other grounds for recovery of possession of the house raised by the landlord in the statement of claim section of the court writ.
6.5 If tenants or their representatives challenge the proportionality of a streamlined eviction action on human rights grounds, then the court may consider the reasons for such a challenge before reaching a decision. Landlords may need to give evidence on the reasons for the eviction action if such a challenge is raised and the sheriff decides that the challenge has sufficient basis to be considered.
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback