In January 2025, an article was posted following the decision in Southern Housing v Mr James Emmanuel [2025] EWCC 58 which considered whether a Judge can permit a landlord to force entry into their tenant’s property to carry out repairs or safety checks. The conclusion of this article was that the legal position concerning whether a Court could grant forced access was unclear. A further, recent County Court decision has cast fresh doubt.

In Taylor Clark Ltd v Mohamed (unreported, Central London County Court, 5 March 2026) District Judge Le Bas held that the Court does have jurisdiction to permit a landlord to force entry into their tenants’ property. DJ Le Bas held that the decision in Southern Housing v Emmanuel was wrong in principle.

In Mohamed the Court placed reliance on various authorities, including Sovereign v Hall (Bristol County Court) 10 July 2024, to conclude that forced access may be granted to facilitate compliance with an injunction. Where a mandatory order for access is in place, and the tenant does not comply, it should follow that the Court can ensure compliance with its own order and the contractual obligations imposed by the tenancy agreement by permitting forced access.

Counsel’s submissions in Mohammed drew a distinction between the Court possessing an outright power to order access and the Court’s powers to order enforce the terms of a contract (the tenancy) wherein the tenant had agreed to provide access. Whilst the decision in Mohamed demonstrates a clear logic (the Court must be able to enforce its orders) it does not address whether or not an explicit power exists. The Judgement in Mohamed is further evidence of is the disparate approach to this issue in the County Court. Clarification regarding the existence, and potentially the extent, of the Court’s powers in these situations would be welcomed.