Also, it could be said that the case of Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza opened the floodgates and its decision helped future case where it concerned human rights especially section 3 of Human Rights Act 1998. For instance, in the case of Nutting v Southern Housing Group Ltd , the claimant and the defendant formed a homosexual relationship. However, their relationship was volatile and Mr Roberts stated that it has ended. Then he died and the association brought possession proceedings against the defendant, which he defended on the ground that he was entitled to succeed to the tenancy under Housing Act 1988, s.17. The court set out the test to be applied when determining whether a person applying to succeed to an assured tenancy had been the deceased tenant's "spouse". The appeal was dismissed and it was held that s.17 was governed by the principles in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30. Also, there are other examples of cases where Godin-Mendoza’s case was applied.
In this case the appellant appealed against a decision that she was not "the surviving spouse" of the deceased within the meaning of the Rent Act 1977 Sch.1 Pt I para.2 (1). However, the appeal was dismissed and it was held that he term "the surviving spouse" in Sch.1 Pt I para.2(1) had rather more formality about it than the term "a person who was living with the original tenant as his or her wife or husband" in Sch.1 Pt I para.2 (2)(a), and the case of Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd and Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza was