Stonewater v Harris: A Big Decision on Landlord Access Rights

Reading Time - About 2 minutes:

A significant new Court Judgment has provided important clarification on one of the most difficult issues facing social landlords - what happens when a landlord needs access to keep a home safe, but the resident repeatedly refuses to let them in?

In Stonewater Limited v Harris [2026] EWCC 42, His Honour Judge Glen of Portsmouth County Court, sitting at Southampton County Count, confirmed that District Judges have, in principle, the power under CPR 70.2A to permit a landlord to force access to a rented property where an existing access injunction has not been complied with.

The Judgment has been described by Stonewater's solicitors, Bevan Brittan, as a 'big step forward for social landlords', although it's important to note that it does not give landlords an unrestricted right to force entry.

Instead, it provides an important new framework for balancing landlord safety obligations with residents' rights in their homes and a potential judicial roadmap for securing the necessary access rights for landlords.

 

What happened in the case?

Stonewater, a housing association headquartered in Leicester, needed access to the resident's home to complete an outstanding Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR) inspection.

As is usual, the tenancy agreement contained an express obligation requiring the tenant to allow reasonable access for inspections and repairs.

An access injunction was granted in January 2026, but forced-entry provisions were initially refused - after the injunction was served, Stonewater made 3 further unsuccessful and well-evidenced attempts to gain access before applying to vary the injunction.

His Honour Judge Glen ultimately concluded that CPR 70.2A could empower the landlord to obtain access by another means where the resident had failed to comply with the Court's order.

 

Why is the Judgment significant?

Recent County Court decisions had taken conflicting approaches to whether courts could authorise forced entry.

In particular, Southern Housing v Emmanuel heard at Bromley County Court by District Judge Cridge in x concluded that CPR 70.2A did not provide the necessary power without statutory authority.

Stonewater v Harris rejected that interpretation - His Honour Judge Glen concluded that the relevant act was enabling the landlord to obtain access and where the tenant does not enable that access voluntarily, CPR 70.2A can, in principle, allow the Court to empower the landlord to achieve it another way.

 

Forced entry remains a last resort

Importantly, the Judgment does not mean landlords can simply force entry whenever access is refused.

HHJ Glen identified significant safeguards - forced entry will not normally be appropriate when the initial injunction is granted because of the serious interference with a resident's home and European Court of Convention rights.

Furthermore, where forced entry is subsequently sought, landlords should expect to be required to provide information about:

• the resident and other household members
• known or potential vulnerabilities
• previous attempts to obtain access
• why forced entry is necessary and proportionate

 

The Judgment also indicates that at least 48 hours' notice should be given before forced access and that entry should not proceed where a resident is present and actively opposing it.

 

What should landlords do?

The Judgment strengthens the case for having robust access procedures rather than treating refused access as simply a failed appointment.

Landlords should:

• ensure tenancy agreements contain appropriate access provisions
• maintain clear evidence of every access attempt
• understand why access is being refused
• identify vulnerabilities and consider reasonable alternatives
• escalate persistent refusals appropriately
• seek legal advice before considering injunction proceedings or forced access

 

Most importantly, landlords should demonstrate that reasonable and proportionate attempts to secure voluntary access have been exhausted first.

 

What does this mean for housing disrepair?

Access is becoming increasingly important within the wider Housing Safety landscape.

Landlords cannot properly investigate damp and mould, diagnose defects, assess hazards or complete remedial works if they cannot enter the property.

This creates a difficult tension: landlords can be held accountable for failing to investigate or remedy unsafe conditions while simultaneously being prevented from doing so by refused access.

That challenge becomes even more significant as landlords respond to Awaab's Law, the updated HHSRS guidance and stronger regulatory expectations around knowing the condition of their homes.

Stonewater v Harris potentially provides landlords with a clearer legal route where reasonable attempts to secure access have failed, meanwhile the case outcome has been welcomed by the ASCP with respect to their Safety Can't Wait Outside campaign.

Matt Sharp, CEO of ASCP, stated:

“This is a significant and welcome judgment, but we should also be honest about what this case tells us. It has taken many months and a substantial legal process simply to establish a route into one home to carry out essential safety checks.

During that time, the gas installation remained unchecked, the electrical installation remained uninspected and any potential safety issue remained unseen and unresolved.

That cannot be the best system we can devise for keeping people safe.”

 

Why does this matter?

Stonewater v Harris is an important development, but caution is necessary.

It is a County Court decision, so it is not binding precedent on other Courts, however, it was decided by a Senior Circuit Judge and carries significant persuasive weight - indeed, Connor Turley of Bevan Brittan describes it as the 'leading authority at County Court level on forced entry in access injunction proceedings'.

The Judgment therefore certainly moves the issue forward.

The question is becoming less about whether a Court can permit forced access and more about when doing so is necessary, proportionate and properly safeguarded.

For landlords trying to meet increasingly demanding repair and safety obligations, that clarification could prove extremely important.

How can DISREPAIR AWARE help?

Many social and private rented homes are not inspected regularly or maintained properly - we want to help improve housing conditions for everyone.

DISREPAIR AWARE helps:

• tenants and leaseholders to understand their legal rights and get support
• registered providers, private landlords and managing agents to understand their legal obligations and get compliant
  

 

You can find more news and insights about housing disrepair on our Blog.

Note: This Blog post may be updated from time to time.