P was in arrears to the mortgagee, D, and sought to defend possession on the grounds that he had been unfairly dismissed by one of P’s associate companies, X, would win money in excess of what he owed to D, and therefore the repossession ought to be stayed. CA rejected D’s argument: a counter-claim does not prevent their being a claim for repossession, and the power to stay proceedings under s.36 AJA 1970 did not apply because repayment would not have been possible within a reasonable period (the unfair dismissal claim was not due for another 2 years at the time of the first instance trial). Also, where it is of no benefit to the mortgagee to allow possession claims against one but not both parties, it is wrong to order that only one of the possessing parties leave.
