[2] Chadwick LJ gave the leading judgment, he said that it was impossible to be satisfied that Parliament had intended, when enacting section 36 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, that the mortgagee's common law right to take possession by virtue of his estate should be exercisable only with the assistance of the court.

The only conclusion as to Parliament's intention which the court could properly reach was that which could be derived from the circumstances in which the section had been enacted, the statutory context in which it appeared, and the language used, and all pointed in the same direction.

[4] Decisions of the final court of appeal demonstrate that the application of the convention to the property relations of non-governmental persons is a challenging task, requiring the clearance of multiple hurdles.

[5] In Manchester City Council v Pinnock the Supreme Court eventually accepted that HRA Art 8 created a freestanding statutory defence to a possession claim in respect of a person's home.

[7] Completely obiter (in a landlord and tenant case) the unanimous panel (writing by two Supreme Justices) in the final court of appeal in a decision in 2016 said: There are a number of types of residential occupiers who are not protected by the Protection from Eviction Act 1977, and who can therefore be physically (albeit peaceably) evicted, such as trespassers, bare licensees, sharers with the landlord and some temporary occupiers, as well, it appears, as mortgagors - see Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc [2000] QB 263.