The courts continue to examine the extent of their powers to grant forced access injunctions, with judges reaching differing conclusions on whether such terms can be attached to access injunctions. In the recent case of Stonewater Limited v Harris [2026], HHJ Glen provided further guidance on when a forced access provision may be appropriate.

This insight considers the judgment and highlights the practical steps social landlords should take when seeking an injunction that includes a forced access provision.

Including forced access terms in injunction orders

For many years, it has been undecided whether the courts have the power to include a term within an access injunction allowing a social landlord to force entry to a property. The issue has received particular attention over the last two years, with judges in four separate cases reaching different conclusions.

In Stonewater v Harris, HHJ Glen concluded that CPR 70.2A(2) permits the court to authorise a social landlord to carry out the "act" that the defendant has failed to perform. In the context of an access injunction, this could include forcing entry to a property where a tenant has failed to comply with an order requiring access.

In reaching this conclusion, HHJ Glen noted that, without such a power, social landlords are often left with two unsatisfactory options:

• bringing committal proceedings for contempt of court, which may still fail to secure access; or
• seeking possession of the property, which he described as a classic example of "using a sledgehammer to crack a nut".

Conditions for granting a forced access provision

In the judgment, HHJ Glen emphasised that forced access orders should only be granted subject to appropriate safeguards. The following principles were identified:

1. A separate application will usually be required: Although it is possible for a forced access provision to be included at the initial hearing, the significant interference with a tenant's property rights and human rights means this will not usually be appropriate. In most cases, a social landlord should first obtain an access injunction and then make a further application if the tenant breaches that order.
2. Information about the tenant must be provided: When seeking a forced access provision, the court will expect social landlords to provide detailed information about the tenant and members of their household, including any known vulnerabilities or support needs.
3. Adequate notice must be given: Any order permitting forced access should require at least 48 hours' notice to be given before entry takes place. Importantly, social landlords should not proceed with forced entry if the tenant is present and actively objecting to access.
4. Consider installing a key safe: HHJ Glen indicated that it would be good practice for an order permitting forced access to also include a requirement for a key safe to be installed externally, enabling future access where necessary.

What does this judgment mean for social landlords?

Until there is further clarification from Parliament or a higher court, approaches may continue to vary between courts. However, the decision in Stonewater v Harris provides helpful guidance to social landlords.

An important postscript

As a non-binding postscript, HHJ Glen states:

The analysis at paragraph 26 of this judgment demonstrates that it is perfectly possible for tenancy agreements to be written in a way that provides that the tenant gives their express consent to entry in their absence, subject to certain conditions being fulfilled. Entry in such circumstances would not be a trespass, nor would a landlord obviously require the sanction of the Court to do something it was contractually entitled to do.

If adopting that approach, great care must be taken in drafting clauses that are compliant with the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Policies and procedures must also reflect those contractual terms, with record-keeping being paramount, to avoid complaints or claims for damages being brought against social landlords.

How Capsticks can help

Our expert team of Housing Management lawyers advise and assist with applications for injunctions that include a forced access provision, advising on best options, pre-action work, policies and procedures. If you have any queries around what's discussed in this article, or the impact of this judgment on your organisation, please speak to Housing Management Partner Sarah Christy to find out more about how Capsticks can help.