What the Government’s latest LGPS consultation means for employers & the social housing sector

We explore what the proposals could mean for administering authorities, participating employers, scheme members and organisations across social housing.
We make the difference. Talk to us: 0333 004 4488 | hello@brabners.com
AuthorsAlice Willetts
4 min read

What happens when tenants refuse access for essential safety checks? The recent case of Southern Housing v Emmanuel tackles this very issue, testing the limits of the court’s authority.
The dispute centred on whether judges could extend access injunctions to grant landlords forced entry. The decision confirmed that the County Court lacks this jurisdiction, creating uncertainty given earlier, more interventionist decisions.
Here, Alice Willetts from our housing litigation team examines the judgment and what it means for landlords facing access refusals.
The case arose after Southern Housing attempted to carry out a gas safety inspection required under the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998. Although an access injunction had already been granted against the tenant, they continued to refuse entry.
Southern Housing then applied to the courts to amend the injunction order to permit forced entry to the property. To support this, they relied on provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), including 25.1 (c)(d) and 3.1(2)(p) 70.2A.
District Judge Cridge rejected the application, ruling that the County Court doesn’t have jurisdiction to authorise landlords to forcibly enter a tenant’s home for inspections, repairs or safety checks. His assessment made clear that the power to authorise forced entry must come from common law principles or statutory authority — neither of which applied here. He emphasised that express authority of Parliament would be required, citing Morris v Beardmore (1981) AC 446.
It was also noted that there’s no power of forced entry in Regulation 36 of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998. Additionally, neither the County Courts Act 1984 nor the Senior Courts Act 1981 give the County Court authority to permit forced entry, except through a warrant of eviction.
There’s an important distinction between the court’s authority to grant an access injunction and authorising landlords to forcibly enter. Permitting forced access to a property wouldn’t be a simple amendment to an injunction order under CPR 70.2A — it would be a different order entirely.
While Judge Cridge confirmed that the County Court doesn’t have the power to authorise forced entry without new legislation from Parliament, he stressed that tenants who ignore an access injunction will face legal consequences. Once such an order is made, tenants are legally required to comply — if they refuse, they’re in breach of the injunction. That breach can carry criminal consequences, exposing tenants to prosecution and opening the door for landlords to pursue possession proceedings.
This decision marks a departure from earlier County Court judgments where forced access clauses have been granted.
For example:
Judge Cridge’s decision challenges these precedents, potentially signalling a shift in judicial interpretation.
Judge Cridge acknowledged the difficulties landlords face when tenants refuse access. However, he stressed that contempt proceedings or possession claims are the proper remedies, not forced entry via amended injunctions.
It’s important to note that this County Court decision isn’t binding and judges in different courts have made and can continue to make different decisions.
The decision is however likely to be persuasive in future cases and landlords may want to consider how they’re going to deal with tenants who obstruct access, particularly in circumstances where they’re failing to comply with the terms of an injunction order.
Landlords can find themselves in a difficult position when tenants refuse access for safety checks or essential works. Our housing team provide clear guidance on enforcing access rights, addressing breaches of injunctions and pursuing possession proceedings.
Talk to us by calling 0333 004 4488, emailing hello@brabners.com or completing our contact form below.

Loading form...

We explore what the proposals could mean for administering authorities, participating employers, scheme members and organisations across social housing.

We look at the core changes introduced by the Mental Health Act 2025 and outline what they’re likely to mean in practice for social housing providers.

Our award-winning regeneration team has launched a new report that uncovers how life and work across the North of England has changed since the millennium.

We examine the Crime and Policing Bill's proposals and outline what RPs need to know to prepare for the changes ahead.

We explore how statutory duties introduced by Awaab's Law interact with development agreements and what social landlords need to consider going forward.

We explore the implications of Mazur, its unanswered questions and what to watch out for as the appeal progresses.

Social landlords will have greater requirements to address hazards under a phased approach starting in October 2025. Our housing law team shares how to prepare.

A reformed Decent Homes Standard (DHS) could extend minimum housing standards that landlords must provide for tenants to the private rented sector.

The UK’s housing sector in 2025 is undergoing major shifts, with Government reforms aiming to boost supply and affordability.

While seating licences can provide a flexible and short-term solution, both landlords and tenants must be cautious of their common pitfalls.

Our housing team explore what developers need to know about boundary issues — from spotting problems early to resolving disputes — to keep projects moving and stay legally compliant.

The Housing Act 1985 leaves significant room for interpretation and discretion in drafting, particularly around lease terms.

The Crime and Policing Bill 2025 is set to introduce new measures and enhanced powers to address ASB — including Respect Orders.

The Renters’ Rights Bill proposes radical change to the housing law landscape and is likely to have a significant impact across both the private and social rented sectors.

Our pensions law team explore recent improvements to the LGPS funding level and share guidance for Housing Associations considering exiting the scheme.

We demystify Mortgagee Protection Clauses and when they should be used.

Our housing lawyers explain the main perspectives of MPs around antisocial behaviour and the options available for landlords to bring court proceedings.

Our housing team explores proposed changes to the shared ownership scheme and its future.

The Government has revamped the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) to pave the way for the delivery of 1.5m new homes over the next five years.

As a ‘Client’, you must make suitable arrangements for planning, managing and monitoring your project to ensure compliance with the Building Regulations.

The Court of Appeal considered the cases of Hajan v Brent LBC & Poplar HARCA v Kerr. What does this outcome mean for landlords and their communities?

Our housing team explores the Law Commission's consultation concerning the legal framework that governs co-operatives and community benefit societies.

The role of assessors appointed under the Equality Act 2010 has recently been explored by the High Court in Laidley v Metropolitan Housing Trust Limited.

In Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police [2024] UKSC 33, the Supreme Court's revised the long-standing legal principle around public body liability.

Our housing and communities law team explore the future of the Right to Buy scheme following calls for reform.