Step 4
Can This Ground Be Disputed?
Ground 2za
1
Possible Dispute 1
"Disputing the allegation of: The tenant has been convicted of an indictable (serious offence)"
1. Explanation
If the landlord’s claim relating to the existence of any conviction for an indictable offence (serious offence) is wrong, the tenant can dispute that has never been convicted of an indictable offence (serious offence).
2. Evidence
a) Evidence that no conviction exists
OR
B) Evidence that a conviction exists but it was NOT for an indictable offence.
3. Advancing your Defence
1
Possible Dispute 1
"Disputing the allegation of: The tenant has been convicted of an indictable (serious offence)"
1. Explanation
If the landlord’s claim relating to the existence of any conviction for an indictable offence (serious offence) is wrong, the tenant can dispute that has never been convicted of an indictable offence (serious offence).
2. Evidence
a) Evidence that no conviction exists
OR
B) Evidence that a conviction exists but it was NOT for an indictable offence.
3. Advancing your Defence
2
Possible Dispute 2
"Disputing the allegation that: The tenant or a person living at the property has been convicted of an indictable offence, but the offence was not committed at the scene of a riot"
1. Explanation
It can be argued that although a tenant or a person living at the property has been convicted of an indictable offence, this offence was not committed at the scene of a riot.
2. Evidence
a) That the offence was not committed at riot as there was not 12 or more people at the scene.
Or
b) That there was 12 or more people at the scene, but such 12 or more people were not engaged in rioting because the 12 or more people at the scene did NOT use or threaten unlawful violence for a common purpose, and their actions did NOT cause someone to fear for their personal safety.
3. Advancing your Defence
2
Possible Dispute 2
"Disputing the allegation that: The tenant or a person living at the property has been convicted of an indictable offence, but the offence was not committed at the scene of a riot"
1. Explanation
It can be argued that although a tenant or a person living at the property has been convicted of an indictable offence, this offence was not committed at the scene of a riot.
2. Evidence
a) That the offence was not committed at riot as there was not 12 or more people at the scene.
Or
b) That there was 12 or more people at the scene, but such 12 or more people were not engaged in rioting because the 12 or more people at the scene did NOT use or threaten unlawful violence for a common purpose, and their actions did NOT cause someone to fear for their personal safety.
3. Advancing your Defence
3
Possible Dispute 3
"Disputing the allegation that the individual who had been convicted of an indictable offence at the scene of a riot is not a person that continues to live there and the remaining person(s) residing at the property are legal tenants"
1. Explanation
It can be argued that the individual convicted who had been convicted of an indictable offence at the scene of a riot is not a person that continues to live there and the remaining person(s) residing at the property are legal tenants.
2. Evidence
a) Provide evidence that the person convicted during the riot no longer lives at the property — such as proof of their new address or that they only stayed temporarily.
b) Show they do not contribute to the household financially or were never a permanent resident — including witness statements from neighbours if available.
c) If you lack such evidence, argue that the landlord has failed to prove the person currently lives at the property, especially if relying on outdated or weak evidence like old CCTV footage.
3. Advancing your Defence
3
Possible Dispute 3
"Disputing the allegation that the individual who had been convicted of an indictable offence at the scene of a riot is not a person that continues to live there and the remaining person(s) residing at the property are legal tenants"
1. Explanation
It can be argued that the individual convicted who had been convicted of an indictable offence at the scene of a riot is not a person that continues to live there and the remaining person(s) residing at the property are legal tenants.
2. Evidence
a) Provide evidence that the person convicted during the riot no longer lives at the property — such as proof of their new address or that they only stayed temporarily.
b) Show they do not contribute to the household financially or were never a permanent resident — including witness statements from neighbours if available.
c) If you lack such evidence, argue that the landlord has failed to prove the person currently lives at the property, especially if relying on outdated or weak evidence like old CCTV footage.
3. Advancing your Defence
Advancing your Defence
If the time limit for filing the defence has not passed
If the time limit for filing the defence has not passed, you need to clearly outline this defence, obtain the necessary evidence, attach the evidence and refer to the attached evidence in the defence form when you are explaining your dispute.
If the time limit for filing the defence has passed
If the time limit for filing the defence has passed, then you need prepare. a written draft of your reasons for the dispute, obtain the necessary evidence and bring it to court and be prepared to advance all such information to the Court Duty adviser, to the opposition, and to the Judge.
FAQ
FAQ
Possible Outcomes of Advancing a Full Dispute
What is the effect if the Court Accepts my dispute within the hearing?
If the court finds that there is enough evidence to prove the Defendant’s full dispute of the claim, or a lack of evidence to prove the landlord’s claim, then the Court can dismiss the Claim and find in favour of the Defendant (the tenant) retaining possession of the property.
What is the effect if the Court Accepts my dispute within the hearing?
What is the effect if the Court Accepts my dispute within the hearing?
What happens if the court does not accept my dispute within the hearing itself but ‘finds that the claim is genuinely disputed on grounds which appear to be substantial‘?
What happens if the court does not accept my dispute within the hearing itself but ‘finds that the claim is genuinely disputed on grounds which appear to be substantial‘?
What happens if the court does not accept my dispute within the hearing itself but ‘finds that the claim is genuinely disputed on grounds which appear to be substantial‘?
What happens if the court does NOT accept my dispute within the hearing and does NOT find that the claim is ‘genuinely disputed on grounds which appear to be substantial‘?
What happens if the court does NOT accept my dispute within the hearing and does NOT find that the claim is ‘genuinely disputed on grounds which appear to be substantial‘?
What happens if the court does NOT accept my dispute within the hearing and does NOT find that the claim is ‘genuinely disputed on grounds which appear to be substantial‘?
Achieve effective, efficient and actionable legal support with TenantShield.
Achieve efficient support by using
our Step-by-Step Legal Guides and AI Assistant.
Achieve effective, efficient and actionable legal support with TenantShield.
Achieve efficient support by using
our Step-by-Step Legal Guides and AI Assistant.
Achieve effective, efficient and actionable legal support with TenantShield.
Achieve efficient support by using
our Step-by-Step Legal Guides and AI Assistant.