A decision in the Court of Appeal (Superstrike vs Rodrigues) recently has caused widespread consternation in the private rented sector as the landmark judgement could affect many landlords and tenancy deposits.

In Superstrike Ltd v Rodrigues, the Court of Appeal ruled that the claimant (Superstrike Ltd) could not serve a Section 21 notice of possession on the defendant following the expiration of an assured shorthold tenancy (AST), as the deposit had not been held in an authorised scheme under the Housing Act 2004.

In summary the Court of Appeal decided that a statutory periodic tenancy constituted a new tenancy. In this case a deposit was paid before 6th April 2007, and as a periodic tenancy (without any changes from the original fixed term) arose after the 6th April 2007, it should have been protected with a tenancy deposit scheme and ‘Prescribed Information’ should have been served.

In the case of Superstrike vs Rodrigues, as it was deemed that the landlord did not protect the deposit or serve ‘Prescribed Information’, so they could not rely on a section 21 notice to gain possession of the property.

The major landlord representative bodies have all issued an initial reaction to this case.

The Residential Landlords Association (RLA) said: “