A covenant against keeping pets did not discriminate against a disabled tenantWednesbury unreasonableness:mental illnessWednesbury unreasonableness:nuisance and annoyanceWednesbury unreasonableness:pets, covenants against keeping

Facts: Ms Thomas-Ashley kept a dog in breach of her tenancy agreement. The dog caused a nuisance by barking and the landlord brought possession proceedings. Ms T-A’s defence was that she suffered from bi-polar mood disorder, her dog was critical to her health and the possession proceedings discriminated against her on the ground of disability, in breach of sections 24A and 24D the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

Judgment: the Court of Appeal (The Chancellor, Thomas LJ and Sir Scott Baker) held that the covenant against keeping animals did not discriminate against Ms T-A on account of her disability or make it unreasonably difficult for her to enjoy the premises; in addition, it would be unreasonable to expect Ms T-A’s landlord to remove that covenant because, if he did so, his own lease would become liable to forfeiture.