Landlord and tenantStatutory instrument - order limiting maximum fair rents to alleviate tenants' hardship - valid because statutory order-making power not confined to countering inflation R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Ex p Spath Holme Ltd: HL (Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Cooke of Thorndon, Lord Hope of Craighead and Lord Hutton): 7 December 2000By an order expressed to be made under the power in section 31 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the secretary of state sought to alleviate hardship among certain tenants by applying a maximum limit to fair rent increases registrable under the Rent Act 1977 for regulated tenancies.

The applicants, landlords of premises let on such tenancies, sought by way of judicial review to quash the order as ultra vires the purpose for which the power in section 31 had been enacted, namely to counter general inflation within the national economy.

The Court of Appeal [2000] 3 WLR 141, construing section 31 by reference to the predecessor provision consolidated by the Act and to ministerial statements made to Parliament during enactment, ruled that exercise of the power was confined to counter-inflationary measures and granted the relief sought.

The secretary of state appealed.Kenneth Parker QC, John Male QC and Philip Sales (instructed by Treasury Solicitor) for the secretary of state.

James Bonney QC and Jonathan Gavaghan (instructed by Willan Bootland White) for the applicants.Held, allowing the appeal, that in construing section 31 it was permissible (Lord Hope of Craighead dubitante and Lord Hutton dissenting) given its wide, albeit unambiguous, language to consider the consolidated provision; but (Lord Cooke of Thorndon dissenting) since the threshold conditions subject to which reference might be made to parliamentary materials were not satisfied, those materials were inadmissible; that, since the 1985 Act was primarily concerned with the landlord/tenant relationship and the protection of tenants from hard or excessive rents, the power in section 31 was not confined only to countering national inflation, but might lawfully be exercised in accordance with the overall protective purpose of the Act; and that, accordingly, the order was valid.