The prosecutor`s letter of July 15, 2009 was followed by the defence counsel`s letter of July 22, 2009, which could not be construed as anything other than a request for consent to the assignment of the lease. It was an indication of the intention not to terminate the lease. With respect to the rejection of the application contained in the letter of July 29, 2009, the reasons for the refusal and, in particular, the statement “You have already decided to terminate your lease before the end of the existing sublease” made no sense and misrepresented the situation when there was no termination. If the Commission does not have a budget form containing a registration of a person mentioned at a tenant`s request to amend the tenancy agreement, we cannot continue. Mr. Wilson then referred to the criteria he called “Lockhart,” which arise from Glasgow City -v- Lockhart 1997 Hous LR 99, in which four issues are considered relevant to the deportation decision. The factors were: the public interest; that defence counsel knew the consequences of what he was doing; The seriousness of the offence and the consequences of the evacuation. With respect to the public interest, the act required the persecutor to assign houses in accordance with its policy, itself based on the need, by sections 19 and 20 of the Housing (Scotland) Act of 1987, as amended by Sections 9 and 10 of the 2001 Act, to assign houses according to its policy, which in turn rested on the necessity of the , and drive a bus and four through this policy. if the themes were assigned to qualified occupants. The persecutor had a legal obligation to adopt rules and rules on priority for the allocation of homes, transfers and exchanges and to make them public (Section 21 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987, as amended by Section 155 of the Housing, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 and the 2001 Act. The persecutor was required to allocate his limited housing stock in accordance with his allocation policy. Qualified occupiers would be very unlikely to secure a Scottish lease on matters relating to this policy, with 8 points scored. With respect to the consequences of evacuating qualified occupants, Mr.
Wilson acknowledged that they would be important, but there was no valid reason why they could not move to a more affordable area, especially since they had access to a motor vehicle. “… The Council is prepared to allow you to refrain from dealing with the issues for a one-year period, which will begin on Monday, August 4, 2008. If the tenancy expires on Sunday, August 2, 2009, you must leave the property as the tenant must resume life in the property. Logically, the next question to consider is whether the lease was terminated by the tenants in July 2009, because if, as Ms. Corsar acknowledged, it would result in the prosecutor having an adoption right, whatever the reasonable reasons.