stay of Eviction order on human rights

[arisenshine]

I hope someone can shed a light on this issue for me, please thanks

Is it possible/ does it make sense to ask the judge in court to grant one more time on medical grounds to stay in the property for one to sort out alternative accommodation (stay of eviction) because evicting without an alternative accommodation would be an infringement on one's basic fundamental human rights, especially of there, are children in the property?

Basically, I am asking if the human rights argument can be used to support a stay of eviction order, please. Thank you

Sorry to hear this is happening to you.
It's accepted by the court that evicting someone does essentially affect their human rights however it weighs up whether it's proportional to do so.
For example if I rented a property to someone and they trashed it and never paid me rent it would breach their human right to evict but would be proportional to stop me going bankrupt.

The court is likely to weigh up all the factors, how long have you been aware you need to find somewhere else? What efforts have been made? Has landlord attempted to negotiate, are you likely to have somewhere to go in the time frame you're asking for?

If you feel comfortable posting more details there are some very knowledgable posters who will be along soon I'm sure

If not try shelter or approaching council housing office

What sort of agreement have you got? Is it private rented? Secure Council Tenancy?
What notice was served? What grounds?
Various ways to gain extra time depending on the above- depending of what notice and grounds were used - can even get a baliff warrant suspended ... really not enough info in your post to give you any advice - but public law defences can be used in certain situations.

I don't know, you're into complicated personal property law there. If I'm honest I can see a judge allowing it as under that argument a homeless person could move into any vacant property citing human right entitlement to a home.
Ultimately it's up to the state to provide homes in extreme circumstances not individual landlords .

I think that last poster meant can't see a judge allowing it

I can’t see it being allowed unless there are very extreme circumstances and very strong medical grounds. What are the medical reasons for needing to stay, and why are you being evicted?

What grounds are being used and is it an AST, secure or assured tenancy?