In a Supreme Court judgement just released, a superior landlord has been held not liable to a rent repayment order to the tenants of his tenant. Mr Rakusen let his property to a company, KPIG, who sub let it to three sharers. This triggered the need for licensing but KPIG did not apply for a licence.
KPIG's tenants applied for a rent repayment order against Mr Rakusen. Mr Rakusen lost in the first and upper tribunals but this was overturned in the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court supported the Court of Appeal judgement agreeing the superior landlord held not liable. Lots of reasons in the judgement but in simple terms how could you "repay" rent which you had not even been paid? This is a victory for common sense and superior landlords (who may not have even given permission for the sub letting). We will now have to see if this decision is enough to trigger Parliament changing the law.