Category: Housing

H, Regina v: CACD 13 Feb 2008

The judge had ruled that the evidence intended to be offered could not create offences within the 1977 Act. Verdicts of not guilty were entered. The decision was a terminating ruling. The prosecutor failed to give the appropriate section 58 undertaking on appealing.
Held: Attending to the purpose of the 2003 Act, the prosecutor’s mistake was recitified and the appeal could continue.
As to the substantial appeal, the judge had found that the tenancy or licence was an excluded one. The resident landlord having terminated the licence, the occupiers became trespassers outside the protection of the 1977 Act. However the judge had erred since the occupiers had been given a minimum term of six months which the landlord’s notice did not abridge. It could be brought to an end only for a breach of its terms.

Judges:

Sir Igor Judge P, David J, David Clarke J

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Crim 483

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection from Eviction Act 1977 1(3A)(a), Criminal Justice Act 2003 58

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Housing

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.406147

Southwark London Borough Council v McIntosh: ChD 2002

The tenant occupied a maisonette under a secure tenancy of the plaintiff. She sought damages for breach of the repairing covenant implied under s11. Questions arose as to whether L should have told her not to dry clothes in a heated cupboard so as to cause damp, if she had whether the resulting damp was a breach of the covenant, and whether water which had leaked from a washing machine pipe in a neighbouring property through her roof was also a breach. L appealed.
Held: The appeal was allowed. There was no duty on L to advise the tenant as to proper use of the cupboard under the section or at all. The tenant had not pleaded that the damp arose from any disrepair or from anything outside. There was no evidence that the landlord was responsible for the leak to the ceiling.

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

[2002] 1 EGLR 25

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Quick v Taff Ely Borough Council CA 1986
Because of fungus, mould growth and dampness, the tenant’s council house was virtually unfit for human habitation in the winter when the condensation was at its worst. Section 32(1) of the 1961 Act implied in the tenancy a covenant by the council to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.221515

Regina v Thanet District Council ex parte Groves: QBD 1993

The applicant lived with her husband and family in rented accomodation. The husband drank, and spent money which should have gone to the rent. Though she had some small involvement, she did not know of the extent of the rent arrears. He left, and she struggled to restore the position, but failed. She appealed a decision that she was intentionally homeless.
Held: The decision was quashed. It was not clear that the evidence which referred to the Applicant’s efforts to cause payment to be made, before her husband left, had been put to the committee which determined that she was intentionally homeless: ‘It is not clear from the evidence put in by the respondents that the sub-committee was made aware of and took into account Mrs Groves’s assertions that she was not responsible for, nor did she acquiescence in, the arrears of rent which had accumulated prior to May 2 1987.’ There were sufficient contra-indications to rebut the assumption that the wife was party to the husband’s failure to pay rent.

Judges:

Mr Justice Roach

Citations:

[1993] 22 HLR 223

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v North Devon District Council ex parte Lewis 1988
The court was asked what the effect of the conduct of one member of a family might be on the classification of other members as being voluntarily homeless: ‘the fact that the Act requires consideration of the family unit as a whole indicates that it . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v London Borough of Harrow ex parte Byrne Admn 28-Feb-1997
Application to review decision that applicant though in priority need was homeless through her own voluntary act in failing to pay rent.
Held: Sufficient evidence had been placed before the committee for it to be able to say that it could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.214459

Basildon District Council v Wahlen: CA 28 Mar 2006

The tenant was a successor tenant with security, and sought to exercise his right to buy. The authority itself claimed possession saying that the property was too large.
Held: The statute gave rise to competing claims.The tenant’s right to buy did not take automatic precedence over the authority’s right to possession. In this case the judge had made his decision in the tenant’s favour without considering the council’s competing claim. Their appeal was allowed.

Judges:

Mr Justice Moses Lord Justice Neuberger

Citations:

Times 17-Apr-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 326

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 118

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Marilyn Hislop ChD 5-Dec-2003
conflict between a landlord’s claim to possession and a tenant’s claim to exercise her right to buy, both being claims arising under the Housing Act 1985. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.239738

Hughes and Another v Greenwich London Borough Council: HL 26 Oct 1993

A headmaster’s occupation of a house in the school was not ‘for the better performance of his duties’, and so was not a tied house, and so he had the right to buy it. A term could not be implied into his contract to require him to occupy the house.

Citations:

Ind Summary 06-Dec-1993, Gazette 17-Dec-1993, Times 26-Oct-1993

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 79 118

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Hughes and Hughes v Greenwich London Borough Council CA 1992
The applicant was headmaster of a boarding school. The contract of employment did not require him to occupy the house, but a new house was built for the headmaster and he moved into it. It was not necessary for him to occupy the house for his . .
Cited – Luxor (Eastbourne) v Cooper HL 1941
The vendor company had instructed agents to sell properties on its behalf and had agreed to pay commission on completion of the sale. The sale was agreed with a prospective purchaser introduced by the agents. Before the sale was completed, the . .
Cited – Liverpool City Council v Irwin HL 31-Mar-1976
The House found it to be an implied term of a tenancy agreement that the lessor was to be responsible for repairing and lighting the common parts of the building of which the premises formed part. In analysing the different types of contract case in . .
Cited – Reilly (J M) v Belfast Corporation 1970
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.81517

Saxon Weald Homes Ltd v Chadwick: CA 26 Oct 2011

whether the respondent tenant has an assured shorthold tenancy of the premises which he currently occupies. The appellant landlord, Saxon Weald Homes Limited, says that he has. The tenant says that he has not and that he has an assured tenancy. The answer to this question depends upon the true meaning of a letter sent by the landlord to the tenant

Judges:

Lord Justice Davis

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 1202, [2011] 44 EG 107, [2012] 1 P and CR DG6, [2012] HLR 8, [2011] 44 EG 107 (CS), [2011] NPC 109

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.447496

Rodriguez v Minister of Housing of The Government and Another: PC 14 Dec 2009

Gibraltar – The claimant challenged a public housing allocation policy which gave preference to married couples and parents of children, excluding same sex and infertile couples.
Held: The aim of discouraging homosexual relationships is equally impermissible under sections 7(1) and 14 of the Constitution of Gibraltar. The suggested aims are incoherent and the means employed are not rationally connected to those aims. The appellant is entitled to a declaration that she has been treated in a discriminatory manner, in contravention of her rights under sections 7 and 14 of the Constitution.
This was not direct discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, because other unmarried couples suffered the same disadvantage. But it was more severe than most cases of indirect discrimination, because the criterion was one which the couple would never be able to meet: ‘Thus it is a form of indirect discrimination which comes as close as it can to direct discrimination’

Judges:

Lord Phillips, Lady Hale, Lord Collins, Sir Jonathan Parker, Sir Henry Brooke

Citations:

[2009] UKPC 52, [2010] UKHRR 144, 28 BHRC 189

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Salgueiro Da Silva Mouta v Portugal ECHR 21-Dec-1999
There was a difference in treatment between the applicant and a comparator based on the applicant’s sexual orientation, a concept which is undoubtedly covered by Article 14. The list set out in this provision is of an indicative nature and is not . .
Cited – Korelc v Slovenia ECHR 12-May-2009
‘the Court reiterates that according to its established case law discrimination means treating differently, without an objective and reasonable justification, persons in relevantly similar situations. . . Such a difference of treatment is . .
Cited – Burden and Burden v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Apr-2008
(Grand Chamber) The claimants were sisters who had lived together all their lives. They complained of discrimination in their treatment under the Inheritance Tax system as opposed to the treatment of a same sex couple living in a sexual . .
Cited – Thlimmenos v Greece ECHR 6-Apr-2000
(Grand Chamber) The applicant was a Jehovah’s Witness who had been convicted of insubordination under the Military Criminal Code for refusing to wear a military uniform at a time of general mobilisation. He was subsequently refused appointment as a . .
Cited – Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 17-Jun-2004
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious . .
Cited – Cerisola (A Child) v Attorney General for Gibraltar PC 6-Mar-2008
(Gibraltar) The constitutional protection against discriminatory treatment is free standing, and is not limited to matters of employment. . .
Cited – Carson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Reynolds v Same HL 26-May-2005
One claimant said that as a foreign resident pensioner, she had been excluded from the annual uprating of state retirement pension, and that this was an infringement of her human rights. Another complained at the lower levels of job-seeker’s . .
Cited – DH v Czech Repiublic ECHR 7-Feb-2006
The claimants, 18 Roma children complained, saying that they had automatically been placed in schools for children with special needs by virtue of their racial origin. . .
Cited – Serife Yigit v Turkey ECHR 20-Jan-2005
A complaint as to the privileging of civil over religious marriages in Turkey was found admissible.
‘ the essential object of Article 8 is to protect the individual against arbitrary interference by the public authorities. There may in addition . .
Cited – EB v France ECHR 14-Mar-2007
A homosexual woman complained that she had not been allowed to adopt a child. Her application was rejected by the French administrative court on grounds based substantially upon her sexual orientation.
Held: The provision was an unlawful . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v M HL 8-Mar-2006
The respondent’s child lived with the estranged father for most of each week. She was obliged to contribute child support. She now lived with a woman, and complained that because her relationship was homosexual, she had been asked to pay more than . .
Cited – Lindsay v United Kingdom ECHR 1986
The position of married couples is not comparable with the position of unmarried couples, so that differences in treatment between them do not amount to discrimination within the meaning of article 14 of the convention. . .
Cited – PM v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Jul-2005
A father complained that tax deductions which were granted to married fathers but not to unmarried fathers were discriminatory. He had paid maintenance for his daughter, but was not allowed to set the payments off against his income tax in the way . .
Cited – Shackell v United Kingdom ECHR 27-Apr-2000
The court held inadmissible a claim by an unmarried woman to widow’s benefit. The parties having chosen not to marry, they could not complain of not having the legal benefits of a marriage. The promotion of marriage by way of limited benefits for . .
Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza HL 21-Jun-2004
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession
The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law . .
Cited – McMichael v United Kingdom ECHR 2-Mar-1995
In the course of care proceedings, medical and social services’ reports were disclosed to the courts, but not to the parents involved.
Held: The courts’ failure to show reports to the parents in care proceedings was a breach of the Convention. . .
Cited – Karner v Austria ECHR 24-Jul-2003
A surviving same-sex partner sought a right of succession to a tenancy (of their previously shared flat). Interveners ‘pointed out that a growing number of national courts in European and other democratic societies require equal treatment of . .
Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza CA 5-Nov-2002
The applicant sought to succeed to the tenancy of his deceased homosexual partner as his partner rather than as a member of his family.
Held: A court is bound by any decision within the normal hierachy of domestic authority as to the meaning . .

Cited by:

Cited – Bull and Another v Hall and Another SC 27-Nov-2013
The court was asked ‘Is it lawful for a Christian hotel keeper, who sincerely believes that sexual relations outside marriage are sinful, to refuse a double-bedded room to a same sex couple?’ The defendants (Mr and Mrs Bull) appealed against a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Human Rights, Housing, Constitutional, Discrimination

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384074

Martin v Medina Housing Association Ltd: CA 31 Mar 2006

The former tenant had set out to buy the council house, but had written to say that she did not intend to go ahead. Her son who had taken over the tenancy after her death now sought, twelve years later, to require the authority to proceed at that original price.
Held: The tenant’s appeal was dismissed. The statute required any notice to be withdrawn in writing, but had not excluded the court’s common law and equitable powers. ‘Although the right to buy had been established, the stage had not been reached in February 1990 at which all matters relating to the grant and to the amount to be left outstanding or advanced on the security of the property had been agreed or determined. In particular there had been no agreement or determination in respect of the mortgage without which the appellant and his mother would have been unable to pay the purchase price. I therefore conclude that in February 1990 they had no equitable interest in the property.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward Sir Martin Nourse Mr Justice Wilson

Citations:

Times 20-Apr-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 367, [2007] 1 WLR 1965, [2007] 1 All ER 813

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hanoman v Southwark London Borough Council ChD 22-Jun-2004
The tenant served his notice under section 122 in 1999. The authority did not admit the claim as required by section 124 within four weeks, but tried ultimately by sending a letter which the tenant never received, to resolve its doubts as to whether . .
Cited – Copping v Surrey County Council CA 21-Dec-2005
The tenants appealed rejection of their application that they should pay the price for their council property set on the first of two notices to buy it.
Held: As to whether the tenants had impliedly withdrawn their first notice: ‘[B]ecause of . .
Cited – Copping v Surrey County Council QBD 2005
The tenants served notice under s122 in 1991 to purchase their council house. The authority denied their right to buy. Nothing happened until June 2001 when the tenants served a second notice and received the same response. By reference to, and upon . .
Cited – Paal Wilson and Co v Partenreederei Hannah Blumenthal (The Hannah Blumenthal) HL 1983
The House was asked whether a contract to abandon an arbitration might be implied from conduct, or a lack of conduct.
Held: The abandonment of a contract can be effected by the entry of the parties, expressly or by necessary inference from . .
Cited – Dance v Welwyn Hatfield Distrrict Council CA 1990
The secure tenants had claimed to exercise their right to buy; the local authority admitted their right and proposed a price which was accepted. The authority offered a partial mortgage which was accepted and by reference to which they had exercised . .
Cited – Collin v Duke of Westminster CA 1985
In 1975 the tenant sought to exercise his right to purchase the freehold reversion of his property. The landlord argued that the rent payable precluded any such entitlement. Under the law as then understood, the landlord’s contention appeared . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.239802

Swansea City Council v Glass: CA 1992

The defendant had failed himself to repair his property, and the Local Authority carried out the work itself under the 1957 Act. It sought to recover the associated costs from the defendant, but he said that their claim was time barred, being more than six years after the work had been concluded. The authority argued that it was not more than six years from when it had served the notices demanding payment.
Held: The notices were not the cause of action, but only a condition precedent to bringing an action. Accordingly time ran from the conclusion of the works, and the claim was out of time.
Taylor LJ said: ‘Section 10(4) provides expressly that where the local authority opts to take summary proceedings to recover their expenses, the limitation period runs from the date of service of the demand or, if there is an appeal, the date when the demand becomes operative. Again, by implication, since no such provision is applied to proceedings in the High Court or County Court, time in those proceedings does not run from the date when the demand is served or becomes operative. It will run from the accrual of the cause of action which, ex hypothesi, is a different time.
The rationale of the distinction between summary and other proceedings probably lies in the respective limitation periods. In summary proceedings the period is six months. If time were to run from the accrual of the cause of action, i.e. when the expenses were incurred, summary proceedings might often be statute-barred before they could be brought, especially where there was an appeal against the demand. In other proceedings, however, the limitation period of six years gives, or should give, the local authority ample time to sue even after an appeal against their demand. In my judgment, the expression, special to section 10(4), that time runs from service of the demand or when it becomes operative, is intended to distinguish summary proceedings from other proceedings. Inclusio unius, exclusio alterius. In other proceedings, time runs from the accrual of the cause of action, i.e. when the four elements identified above are complete. Thus, I conclude that the requirement to serve a demand is a procedural condition precedent to bringing proceedings. It is not part of the cause of action.
I am fortified in this view by consideration of what could result if the local authority were right. Upon their argument, the local authority could delay service of a demand indefinitely. Then, having served their demand long after the works were complete, they would have a further six years in which to take proceedings in the High Court or the county court.’
Taylor LJ also noted that: ”Although not on all fours with the present case, these decisions show that a cause of action may well accrue before, for procedural reasons, the plaintiff can bring proceedings. Where the cause of action arises from statute, the question as to what is merely procedural and what is an ‘inherent element’ in the cause of action is one of construction.’ It is a question of construction of the relevant instrument, whether statute, regulations, rules or contract, in each case as to whether there is such a difference.

Judges:

Taylor LJ

Citations:

[1992] 1 QB 844, [1992] CLY 2828, [1992] 2 All ER 680, [1992] 3 WLR 123

Statutes:

Housing Act 1957 10(4), Limitation Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Coburn v Colledge CA 5-Apr-1897
A solicitor commenced an action on June 12th, 1896 for his fees for work which had been completed on May 30th 1889.
Held: A period of limitation runs from the date on which the ingredients of the cause of action are complete. The statute of . .
Cited – Central Electricity Generating Board v Halifax Corporation HL 1963
Under the 1947 Act, the assets of electricity undertakings were transferred to to electricity boards. Property held by local authorities as authorised undertakers should, on vesting day, vest in the relevant board. A question arose as to whether . .
Cited – Sevcon Ltd v Lucas CAV Ltd HL 1986
A claim was brought for the infringement of a patent. It was brought after the specification had been published, but before the patent had been sealed.
Held: Time might run from a date before the plaintiff was entitled to sue. The cause of . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Amanullah Khan and The Wellcome Trust ChD 13-Jun-2001
The authority had served notices on the second defendant, requiring him to execute works to bring a property up to a habitable condition. Eventually the authority executed the works themselves, and sought repayment from him of the costs. He resisted . .
Cited – Legal Services Commission v Henthorn CA 30-Nov-2011
The Commission sought to recover what it said were payments made on account to the respondent barrister, but only after many years had passed. The Commission argued that time only began to run once it requested repayment.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – Hillingdon London Borough Council v ARC Ltd ChD 12-Jun-1997
The Council had taken possession of the company’s land under compulsory purchase powers, but the company delayed its claim for compensation, and the Council now said that the claim was time barred.
Held: The claim was indeed time barred. The . .
Cited – Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Khan and Wellcome Trust ChD 8-Jun-2001
. .
Cited – Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Khan and Another CA 16-Jan-2002
. .
Cited – Howe v Motor Insurers’ Bureau QBD 22-Mar-2016
The claimant sought damages after a road traffic accident in France caused by a wheel spinning from a still unidentified lorry.
Held: Rejected . .
Cited – FMX Food Merchants Import Export Co Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 29-Jan-2020
This appeal concerns the meaning and effect of the phrase ‘Customs Debt’ in article 221(4) of the former Customs Code of the EU, contained in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92. Customs duties may be due under ‘post-clearance demands’ and the Court . .
Cited – Doyle v PRA Group (UK) Ltd CA 23-Jan-2019
Whether the cause of action for the outstanding sums accrued when Mr Doyle first defaulted in his payments or only when Mr Doyle failed to comply with the default notice stipulated by CCA s.87(1) and required by clause 8f of the Agreement. Mr Doyle . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Housing, Local Government

Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.180520

Manchester City Council v Pinnock: SC 9 Feb 2011

The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . Convention . . requires a court, which is being asked to make an order for possession under section 143D(2) of the [1996] Act against a person occupying premises under a demoted tenancy, to have the power to consider whether the order would be ‘necessary in a democratic society’ and, if so, whether section 143D(2) is compatible with article 8 of the Convention’
Held: Though in this case, the decision stood, the answers were ‘Yes’, and section 143 of the 1985 Act could be read down to achieve this. ‘if our law is to be compatible with article 8, where a court is asked to make an order for possession of a person’s home at the suit of a local authority, the court must have the power to assess the proportionality of making the order, and, in making that assessment, to resolve any relevant dispute of fact.’
However: ‘in virtually every case where a residential occupier has no contractual or statutory protection, and the local authority is entitled to possession as a matter of domestic law, there will be a very strong case for saying that making an order for possession would be proportionate. However, in some cases there may be factors which would tell the other way.’
Where it is required in order to give effect to an occupier’s article 8 Convention rights, the court’s powers of review can, in an appropriate case, extend to reconsidering for itself the facts found by a local authority, or indeed to considering facts which have arisen since the issue of proceedings, by hearing evidence and forming its own view . . if the procedure laid down in section 143E or 143F has not been lawfully complied with, either because the express requirements of that section have not been observed or because the rules of natural justice have been infringed, the tenant should be able to raise that as a defence to a possession claim under section 143D(2).
The court set out the principles it had derived from the case law: ‘(a) Any person at risk of being dispossessed of his home at the suit of a local authority should in principle have the right to raise the question of the proportionality of the measure, and to have it determined by an independent tribunal in the light of article 8, even if his right of occupation under domestic law has come to an end . .
(b) A judicial procedure which is limited to addressing the proportionality of the measure through the medium of traditional judicial review (i e, one which does not permit the court to make its own assessment of the facts in an appropriate case) is inadequate as it is not appropriate for resolving sensitive factual issues . .
(c) Where the measure includes proceedings involving more than one stage, it is the proceedings as a whole which must be considered in order to see if article 8 has been complied with . .
(d) If the court concludes that it would be disproportionate to evict a person from his home notwithstanding the fact that he has no domestic right to remain there, it would be unlawful to evict him so long as the conclusion obtains – for example, for a specified period, or until a specified event occurs, or a particular condition is satisfied.’
Lord Neuberger summarised the court’s obligations to follow European Court judgments: ‘This court is not bound to follow every decision of the European court. Not only would it be impractical to do so: it would sometimes be inappropriate, as it would destroy the ability of the court to engage in the constructive dialogue with the European court which is of value to the development of Convention law: see e g R v Horncastle [2010] 2 AC 373. Of course, we should usually follow a clear and constant line of decisions by the European court: R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator [2004] 2 AC 323. But we are not actually bound to do so or (in theory, at least) to follow a decision of the Grand Chamber. As Lord Mance pointed out in Doherty v Birmingham City Council [2009] AC 367, para 126, section 2 of the 1998 Act requires our courts to ‘take into account’ European court decisions, not necessarily to follow them. Where, however, there is a clear and constant line of decisions whose effect is not inconsistent with some fundamental substantive or procedural aspect of our law, and whose reasoning does not appear to overlook or misunderstand some argument or point of principle, we consider that it would be wrong for this court not to follow that line.’

Judges:

Lord Phillips, President, Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Rodger, Lord Walker, Lady Hale, Lord Brown, Lord Mance, Lord Neuberger, Lord Collins

Citations:

[2011] UKSC 6, [2011] 2 All ER 586, [2011] NPC 16, [2011] 2 WLR 220, UKSC 2009/0180, [2011] 2 AC 104

Links:

Bailii, SC Summary, SC

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 84 143, Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, Housing Act 1980, European Convention on Human Rights 8, Housing Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
Appeal from – Manchester City Council v Pinnock CA 31-Jul-2009
The court considered the status in law of ‘demoted tenants’, those who had been secure social housing tenants, but who had only limited security after being found to have behaved anti-socially. The tenant had been refused an opportunity by the . .
Cited – Zehentner v Austria ECHR 16-Jul-2009
ECHR The applicant’s apartment was subject to a judicial sale for non-payment of debt. She was ill, and did not participate in the sale. The local law had time limits for challenging a judicial sale, designed to . .
Cited – Connors v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-May-2004
The applicant gypsies had initially been permitted to locate their caravan on a piece of land owned by a local authority, but their right of occupation was brought to an end because the local authority considered that they were committing a . .
Cited – Kay And Others v United Kingdom ECHR 21-Sep-2010
(Fourth Section) After carefully considering the various views expressed in the House of Lords in Kay v Lambeth [2006] 2 AC 465 and Doherty v Birmingham [2009] 1 AC 367, and the relevant decisions of the Court of Appeal, the EurCtHR stated, at paras . .
Cited – London Borough of Harrow v Qazi HL 31-Jul-2003
The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and . .
Cited – Cosic v Croatia ECHR 15-Jan-2009
The applicant teacher was provided a flat by her school, which it in had leased from the Yugoslavian Army. That lease expired in 1990. She remained, paying rent to the school. Ultimately the Croatian State, which had assumed ownership of Yugoslavian . .
Cited – Doherty and others v Birmingham City Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local authority can obtain a summary order for possession against an occupier of a site which it owns and has been used for many years as a gipsy and travellers’ caravan site. His licence to occupy the site has come to . .
Cited – Blecic v Croatia ECHR 29-Jul-2004
The applicant had for many years before 1992 had a protected tenancy of a publicly-owned flat in Zadar. Under Croatian law a specially-protected tenancy might be terminated if the tenant ceased to occupy the flat for a continuous period of six . .
Cited – McCann v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-May-2008
The applicant and his wife were secure joint tenants of a house of a local authority under section 82. Their marriage broke down, and the applicant’s wife moved out of the house with the two children of the marriage. She returned after obtaining a . .
Cited – Blecic v Croatia ECHR 8-Mar-2006
The applicant alleged that her rights to respect for her home and to peaceful enjoyment of her possessions had been violated on account of the termination of her specially protected tenancy.
Held: Ratione temporis, the court had had no . .
Cited – Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others HL 8-Mar-2006
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the . .
Cited – Cumming v Danson CA 1942
The court considered what amounted to reasonable alternative accomodation.
Held: it was the judge’s duty to take into account all relevant circumstances as they exist at the date of the hearing. There is a fundamental difference in the Rent . .
Cited – Di Palma v United Kingdom ECHR 1-Dec-1986
(Commission/admissibility) The applicant’s lease was forfeited on her non-payment of a service charge and possession was ordered. Her primary claim was made (unsuccessfully) under article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention. But she also . .
Cited – Salford City Council v Mullen CA 30-Mar-2010
The court considered the status of decisions to commence proceedings for possession by local authorities against tenants not protected under any statutory scheme. The tenants, on introductory tenancies and under the homelessness regime, argued that . .
Cited – Horncastle and Others, Regina v SC 9-Dec-2009
Each defendant said they had not received a fair trial in that the court had admitted written evidence of a witness he had not been allowed to challenge. The witnesses had been victims, two of whom had died before trial. It was suggested that the . .
Cited – Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 17-Jun-2004
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious . .
Cited – Wandsworth London Borough Council v Winder HL 1985
Rent demands were made by a local authority landlord on one of its tenants. The local authority, using its powers under the Act, resolved to increase rents generally. The tenant refused to pay the increased element of the rent. He argued that the . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Mayor Commonalty and Citizens of London v Samede (St Paul’s Churchyard Camp Representative) and Others CA 22-Feb-2012
The defendants sought to appeal against an order for them to vacate land outside St Paul’s Cathedral in London which they occupied as a protest.
Held: The application for leave to appeal failed. The only possible ground for appeal was on the . .
Cited – Sims v Dacorum Borough Council SC 12-Nov-2014
Surrender at Common Law Survives Human Rights Law
The tenants held a secure weekly tenancy of the respondent under a joint tenancy. After a relationship breakdown, Mrs Sims had given notice to quit. Mr Sims, left in possession now argued that the common law rules should not be allowed to deprive . .
Cited – Chester, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 16-Oct-2013
The two applicants were serving life sentences for murder. Each sought damages for the unlawful withdrawal of their rights to vote in elections, and the failure of the British parliament to take steps to comply with the judgment.
Held: The . .
Cited – Moohan and Another v The Lord Advocate SC 17-Dec-2014
The petitioners, convicted serving prisoners, had sought judicial review of the refusal to allow them to vote in the Scottish Referendum on Independence. The request had been refused in the Outer and Inner Houses.
Held: (Kerr, Wilson JJSC . .
Cited – Haney and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice SC 10-Dec-2014
The four claimants, each serving indeterminate prison sentences, said that as they approached the times when thy might apply for parol, they had been given insufficient support and training to meet the requirements for release. The courts below had . .
Cited – McDonald v McDonald and Others SC 15-Jun-2016
Her parents had bought a house and granted tenancies to their adult daughter (the appellant), who suffered a personality disorder. They became unable to repay the mortgage. Receivers were appointed but the appellant fell into arrears with the rent. . .
Cited – Watts v Stewart and Others CA 8-Dec-2016
The court considered the status of residents of almshouses, and in particular whether they were licensees or tenants with associated security.
Held: The occupier’s appeal failed: ‘We do not accept the proposition that, if and insofar as Mrs . .
Cited – Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 10-May-2017
The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental . .
Cited – Kiarie and Byndloss, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 14-Jun-2017
The court considered a challenge to the rules governing ‘out of country’ appeals against immigration decisions. They had in each case convictions leading to prison terms for serious drugs related offences.
Held: The appeals were allowed, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights, Constitutional

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.428517

Regina v Eastleigh Borough Council, Ex parte Betts; In re Betts: CA 1983

Mr Betts appealed a refusal of accomodation by Eastliegh who had said he had no local connection, but had lived in Blaby.
Held: Lord Justice Stephenson the chief housing officer ‘did fetter the council’s decision by a rigid application of the suggested definition of normal residence [in the Agreement on Procedures]’ and allowed his appeal.

Judges:

Lord Justice Stephenson

Citations:

[1983] 1 WLR 774

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Eastleigh Borough Council, Ex parte Betts; In re Betts HL 27-Jul-1983
Mr Betts applied to Eastleigh for accommodation under the 1977 Act. They said that he had no local connection and referred his application to Blaby where the applicant and his family had formerly been living. Blaby accepted the referral and offered . .
Cited – Ozbek v Ispwich Borough Council CA 4-May-2006
The claimant applied to be housed as a homeless person. The authority sought to refer him to a different authority under s198. As an asylum seeker, he had been given assistance both in Portsmouth and Southampton before coming to Ipswich. He said . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.242516

Shelley v London County Council: CA 1948

Taking into account the scope and policy of the Housing Acts, local authorities’ powers of management of housing accommodation should be construed ‘in the widest possible sense.’

Judges:

Lord Greene MR

Citations:

[1948] 1 KB 274

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Approved – Regina v London Borough of Ealing, Ex parte Lewis CA 1992
The court was asked as to the issue of a local housing authority’s power under the 1989 Act, to expend money on ‘the repair, maintenance, supervision and management of houses and other property’.
Held: The phrase should be given ‘a wide . .
Cited – Akumah v London Borough of Hackney HL 3-Mar-2005
The authority set up a parking scheme for an estate of house of which it was the landlord. Those not displaying parking permits were to be clamped. The appellant complained that the regulations had been imposed by council resolution, not be the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.223152

Regina v London Borough of Ealing, Ex parte Lewis: CA 1992

The court was asked as to the issue of a local housing authority’s power under the 1989 Act, to expend money on ‘the repair, maintenance, supervision and management of houses and other property’.
Held: The phrase should be given ‘a wide construction’ (Lloyd LJ) and Woolf LJ: it should receive ‘a generous interpretation’.

Judges:

Lloyd LJ, Woolf LJ

Citations:

(1992) 24 HLR 484

Statutes:

Local Government and Housing Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Shelley v London County Council CA 1948
Taking into account the scope and policy of the Housing Acts, local authorities’ powers of management of housing accommodation should be construed ‘in the widest possible sense.’ . .

Cited by:

Cited – Akumah v London Borough of Hackney HL 3-Mar-2005
The authority set up a parking scheme for an estate of house of which it was the landlord. Those not displaying parking permits were to be clamped. The appellant complained that the regulations had been imposed by council resolution, not be the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.223151

Paterson v Aggio: CA 1987

The Court considered whether a tenancy was a ‘protected shorthold tenancy’ within the meaning of section 52 of the Housing Act 1980 and therefore excluded from the protection of the Rent Act 1977.
Held: A power to forfeit within the minimum year tenancy for the bankruptcy of the tenant, was not to be taken to mean it was not a shorthold tenancy. ‘although on a strict construction’ it could be said that ‘the requirement not to become a bankrupt was not an ‘obligation’ on the tenant’, this would defeat the plain intention of the legislature. ‘ and ‘if a tenant under the terms of the tenancy agreement with which we are concerned went bankrupt, this must amount to a breach by him of an obligation or a term or condition of the tenancy and, in the context of the Rent Acts, would entitle the landlord to possession under Case 1 of Schedule 15 to the 1977 Act.’

Judges:

May LJ

Citations:

[1987] 2 EGLR 127

Statutes:

Housing Act 1980 52, Rent Act 1977 Sch 15 C 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re Drew (A Bankrupt) 1929
(Ireland) A tenant subject to a re-entry clause in his tenancy agreement in the case of his being made bankrupt, and who had gone bankrupt had broken an obligation of his tenancy. He was not protected from an order for possession. ‘The tenant here . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cadogan Estates Limited v McMahon HL 26-Oct-2000
When a tenancy was terminated and was followed by a statutory tenancy, a term in the contractual tenancy that the tenancy should be forfeit on the tenant’s bankruptcy was continued in and inherited by the statutory tenancy. Though perhaps in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Insolvency, Housing

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.196910

Tagro v Cafane and Another: CA 23 Jan 1991

The private landlord held premises under a lease from a local authority which prohibited sub-letting and assignment. He sub-let to the plaintiff and then unlawfully evicted her. He appealed against an award to her of statutory damages, submitting that the prohibition of sub-letting and assignment in the lease meant that the market value of the landlord’s interest in the property under s.28 was virtually nil.
Held: The argument was rejected.
Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘I do not understand that section to contemplate, as Mr Carnwath’s argument contemplates, that the premises will be treated as virtually inalienable and having no value in consequence. Subsection (3) clearly contemplates that there shall be no increase in the damages because the effect of the tenant being dispossessed is that it enables some very valuable development to take place. But the whole concept of the landlord in default selling his interest on the open market to a willing buyer assumes that he can sell it on the open market to a willing buyer, and that involves the subsidiary proposition on the facts of this case that the willing buyer would take a lease from the Lambeth London Borough Council on a monthly basis subject to the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 with a covenant against subletting or assignment in exactly the same way as Mr Cafane had done. In my judgment, there is nothing in that point.’

Judges:

Lord Donaldson MR, Russell and Nolan LJJ

Citations:

[1991] 1 EGLR 279, [1991] 2 All ER 235, [1991] EWCA Civ 1, (1991) 23 HLR 250, [1991] EGCS 5, [1991] 1 WLR 378

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988 28

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – London Borough of Lambeth v Loveridge CA 10-May-2013
The Council had been found to have unlawfully evicted the respondent, and now appealed against the calculation of statutory damages awarded. It said that the court should in its valuation have allowed for the propensity for a move from a secure . .
Cited – Loveridge v London Borough of Lambeth SC 3-Dec-2014
The Council had granted a weekly secure tenancy of the premises to the appellant. The Court considered the calculation of damages awarded for an unlawful eviction of a residential tenant.
Held: Section 28(1)(a) requires the basis of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Damages

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.245295

Paulic v Croatia: ECHR 22 Oct 2009

The State re-acquired a former Yugoslavian Army flat and brought a civil action seeking the applicant’s eviction on the basis that he never obtained a specially protected tenancy under domestic law. The Croatian court ordered his eviction.
Held: The national court had not analysed the proportionality of the measure, and had breached Article 8: ‘In this connection the Court reiterates that any person at risk of an interference with his right to home should in principle be able to have the proportionality and reasonableness of the measure determined by an independent tribunal in the light of the relevant principles under Article 8 of the Convention, notwithstanding that, under domestic law, he or she has no right to occupy a flat (see McCann v United Kingdom No 19009/04, paragraph 50, 13 May 2008). The Court, however, emphasises that such an issue does not arise automatically in each case concerning an eviction dispute. If an applicant raises an Article 8 defence to prevent eviction, it is for him to do so and for a court to rebut the claim. As previously held, the Court does not accept that the grant of the right to an occupier to raise an issue under Article 8 would have serious consequences for the functioning of the domestic systems or for the domestic law of landlord and tenant (see McCann v United Kingdom, cited above, paragraphs 28 and 54).’

Citations:

3572/06, [2009] ECHR 1614

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Cited – McCann v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-May-2008
The applicant and his wife were secure joint tenants of a house of a local authority under section 82. Their marriage broke down, and the applicant’s wife moved out of the house with the two children of the marriage. She returned after obtaining a . .

Cited by:

Cited – Coombes, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another Admn 8-Mar-2010
The landlord council brought proceedings for possession. The tenant (C) had remained in possession after his mother’s death, but enjoyed no second statutory succession. He had lived there since 1954 when he was six. C sought a declaration of . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
Cited – London Borough of Hounslow v Powell, Leeds City Council v Hall etc SC 23-Feb-2011
In each case the tenant occupied the property as his home, but was not a secure tenant of the local authority. The Court was asked whether, in granting a possession order in such a case, the court was obliged to consider the proportionality of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.376325

Birmingham City Council v Qasim and Others: CA 20 Oct 2009

The council argued that the defendant was not a tenant granted to him as a secure tenancy since he had not been granted the tenancy in accordance with its policies. An employee had manipulated the Council’s system to grant tenancies to bypass the controls. There was no evidence of this having been done for payment.
Held: The Authority’s appeal failed. It depended on eliding a distinction between the allocation policy and the grant of a tenancy: ‘what happened in each of the present cases was a breach of the statutorily prescribed procedure for selecting an applicant to be a secure tenant of available accommodation, not a purported disposal by way of the grant of a secure tenancy other than in accordance with statutory requirements . . the fact that the anterior public law procedural requirement of compliance with the Scheme was not complied with by no means necessarily means that the subsequent grant of a tenancy was invalid.’

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 1080

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 79, Housing Act 1996 159

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Credit Suisse v Allerdale Borough Council CA 20-May-1996
Builder’s Guarantee Ultra Vires LA
The council set out to provide a swimming pool using powers under s.19 of the 1976 Act. Purporting to use powers under s.111 of the 1972 Act, it set up a company to develop a site by building a leisure pool and time-share units, with a view to . .
Cited – Stretch v West Dorset District Council CA 10-Nov-1997
A local authority has no ability to grant an option to renew a lease, even though it has the power to grant a lease and would benefit from the wrongful grant. The land was held for an express statutory purpose and was not ‘corporate land’ within the . .
Mentioned – Ahmad, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Newham HL 4-Mar-2009
The claimant wished to be rehoused by the defendant authority. He complained that their allocations policy was unlawful. Once an applicant was deemed in priority need, he entered a pool if such persons and houses were allocated (save in extreme . .
Cited – McCann v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-May-2008
The applicant and his wife were secure joint tenants of a house of a local authority under section 82. Their marriage broke down, and the applicant’s wife moved out of the house with the two children of the marriage. She returned after obtaining a . .
Cited – London Borough of Lambeth v A CA 23-Jul-2002
The court considered the lawfulness of the defendant authority’s housing policy. Collins J said: ‘Unless it is clear that no applicants who are not entitled to preference are able to compete on equal terms with those who are, the scheme cannot . .
Cited – Islington v Uckac and Another CA 30-Mar-2006
The council’s tenant had unlawfully secured assignment of a secure tenancy to the defendant. The council sought possession.
Held: A secure tenancy granted by an authority pursuant to a misrepresentation by the tenant is nonetheless valid. The . .
Cited – Stretch v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Jun-2003
The claimant had taken a lease of property from a local authority. Relying upon an option for renewal, he invested substantially in the property, but it was then decided that the option was ultra vires.
Held: Property rights protected under . .
Cited – Smith (Kathleen Rose) v East Elloe Rural District Council HL 26-Mar-1956
The plaintiff challenged a compulsory purchase order as unlawful and made in bad faith and sought damages for trespass. Paragraph 16 provided that an order could not be challenged by legal proceedings, save in the circumstances identified in . .
Cited – Akinbolu v Hackney London Borough Council CA 13-May-1996
The fact that a secure tenant was an illegal and an overstaying immigrant and therefore should not have been granted a tenancy, gave no right to the council as landlord summarily to evict him. . .
Cited – Boddington v British Transport Police HL 2-Apr-1998
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.376204

Swindon Borough Council v Redpath: CA 11 Sep 2009

The defendant appealed against the issuing of an anti-social behaviour order for ‘housing-related conduct’ where the conduct alleged had no connection with council tenants or property.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘Housing-related’ meant ‘directly or indirectly relating to or affecting the housing management functions of a relevant landlord’. The defendant was a former council tenant, his conduct was required to be looked at as a whole, and there was in this case a sufficiet nexus to allow the making of an order. The 2006 Act had considerably widened the scope for such orders and amounted to a fundamental reworking of the anti-social behaviour order system.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rix, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury and Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 943, [2010] PTSR 904

Links:

Times, Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 153A(1), Police and Justice Act 2006 26

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Birmingham City Council v James and Another CA 17-May-2013
The appellant challenged an injunction under the 2009 Act excluding him from parts of Birmingham. He said that it prevented him visiting his mother.
Held: The appeal failed. Moore-Bick LJ said: ‘It was for the judge to decide on the basis of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Housing

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.374698

Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 10 May 2017

The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental difficulties which afflicted her following that incarceration. She now appealed from rejection of that claim by the County Court and the Court of Appeal.
Held: The appeal failed. Until a clear and direct judgment was available from the ECHR, the court was to follow the decision in Ali.
The appellant’s factual account had inconsistencies and the assessing officer’s factual conclusions were understandable, and disclosed no error of law.
‘The scope and limits of the concept of a ‘civil right’, as applied to entitlements in the field of public welfare, raise important issues as to the interpretation of article 6, on which the views of the Chamber are unlikely to be the last word. In my view, this is a case in which, without disrespect to the Chamber, we should not regard its decision as a sufficient reason to depart from the fully considered and unanimous conclusion of the court in Ali. It is appropriate that we should await a full consideration by a Grand Chamber before considering whether (and if so how) to modify our own position.’
The Court repeated its request for restraint in the extent and number of authorities quoted to it.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 36, [2017] 3 All ER 1065, [2017] AC 624, [2017] HLR 28, [2017] WLR(D) 323, [2017] 2 WLR 1417, UKSC 2015/0219

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 140217 am Video, SC 140217 pm Video, WLRD

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996, European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Tomlinson and Others v Birmingham City Council SC 17-Feb-2010
The appellant asked whether the statutory review of a housing authority’s decision on whether he was intentionally homeless was a determination of a civil right, and if so whether the review was of the appropriate standard. The claimant said that . .
Appeal from – Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea CA 8-Jul-2015
The claimant sought housing under the homelessness provisions. She had refused a final offer accommodation n the grounds that it brought back memories of her prison cell in Iran, and which would exacerbate the post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety . .
Cited – Slater v London Borough of Lewisham CA 12-Apr-2006
The applicant was heavily pregnant when she was offered a first floor one bedroomed flat. She rejected it.
Held: When a housing authority reviewed its decision on the applicant’s decision not to accept the accommodation offered, that review . .
Cited – Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond Upon Thames HL 4-Feb-2009
The father had been awarded shared residence for three children. He asked the local authority to provide appropriate housing.
Held: The authority’s appeal succeeded.
‘When any family court decides with whom the children of separated . .
Cited – El-Dinnaoui v Westminster City Council CA 20-Mar-2013
The appellant and his family sought rehousing. The appellant’s wife had a medically-confirmed history of anxiety due to fear of heights. They were offered a flat on the 16th floor. She became distressed on leaving after the inspection and collapsed . .
Cited – Fazia Ali v The United Kingdom ECHR 20-Oct-2015
The Court considered the duties imposed on housing authorities under Part VII of the 1996 Act.
Held: Article 6.1 did apply, but in any event the procedure applied under the Act conformed to its requirements. . .
Cited – Feldbrugge v The Netherlands ECHR 29-May-1986
The court was asked whether the applicant’s entitlement to a statutory sickness allowance, which was a contributory scheme but for which she had not registered due to illness, was a civil right within the meaning of article 6.
Held: The . .
Cited – Salesi v Italy ECHR 26-Feb-1993
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings . .
Cited – Mennitto v Italy ECHR 5-Oct-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings . .
Cited – Tsfayo v The United Kingdom ECHR 14-Nov-2006
The applicant challenged the prodecures for deciding her appeal against the council’s refusal to pay backdated housing benefits. She complained that the availability of judicial review of the decision was not adequate.
Held: The system did not . .
Cited – Schuler-Zgraggen v Switzerland ECHR 24-Jun-1993
The court considered a contributory invalidity scheme: ‘today the general rule is that Article 6(1) does apply in the field of social insurance, including even welfare assistance . . State intervention is not sufficient to establish that Article . .
Cited – Loiseau v France ECHR 28-Sep-2004
ECHR Judgment (Merits) – No violation of Art. 6-1.
The court referred to ‘a ‘private right’ which can be said, at least on arguable grounds, to be recognised under domestic law’ and to ‘an individual right . .
Cited – Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods . .
Cited – Stec and Others v United Kingdom ECHR 6-Jul-2005
. .
Cited – Nzolameso v City of Westminster SC 2-Apr-2015
The court was asked ‘When is it lawful for a local housing authority to accommodate a homeless person a long way away from the authority’s own area where the homeless person was previously living? ‘ The claimant said that on applying for housing she . .
Cited – London Borough of Newham v Adan CA 14-Dec-2001
The applicant was a Dutch national. She appealed for housing as a homeless person. The local authority, after review found her not to have a settled intention to stay in England. She appealed, to the County Court, and succeeded, and the Authority . .
Cited – Boulois v Luxembourg ECHR 3-Apr-2012
(Grand Chamber) The claimant complained that as a prisoner he had been deprived of his right to a fair hearing and his right of access to a court in connection with the decisions refusing his requests for prison leave.
Held: The complaint was . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 9-Feb-2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . .
Cited – Regina v Hillingdon London Borough Council Ex parte Puhlhofer HL 2-Jan-1986
Not Homeless Even if Accomodation Inadequate
The applicants, a married couple, lived with a young child and later also a baby in one room of a guest house. They were given breakfast but had no cooking or washing facilities. They succeeded on a judicial review of the housing authority’s . .
Cited – Keyu and Others v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Another SC 25-Nov-2015
The Court was asked whether the respondents should be required to hold a public inquiry into a controversial series of events in 1948, when a Scots Guards patrol was alleged to shot and killed 24 unarmed civilians in a village called Batang Kali, in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.582172

Fazia Ali v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Oct 2015

The Court considered the duties imposed on housing authorities under Part VII of the 1996 Act.
Held: Article 6.1 did apply, but in any event the procedure applied under the Act conformed to its requirements.

Judges:

Guido Raimondi, P

Citations:

40378/10 (Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) : Court (Fourth Section)), [2015] ECHR 924, [2015] HLR 46, (2016) 63 EHRR 20

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights, Housing Act 1996 193

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – Tomlinson and Others v Birmingham City Council SC 17-Feb-2010
The appellant asked whether the statutory review of a housing authority’s decision on whether he was intentionally homeless was a determination of a civil right, and if so whether the review was of the appropriate standard. The claimant said that . .

Cited by:

Cited – Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 10-May-2017
The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.554348

Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: CA 8 Jul 2015

The claimant sought housing under the homelessness provisions. She had refused a final offer accommodation n the grounds that it brought back memories of her prison cell in Iran, and which would exacerbate the post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety attacks and other conditions from which she suffered. The Council’s rejection of these grounds were upheld by the County Court.
Held: Her appeal was rejected (Elias LJ dissenting). The reviewing officer had properly considered the relevant issues and reached a valid decision.
Moore-Bick LJ summarised what he understood to be the critical difference between the other judgments, and commented: ‘The point on which my Lords are divided is whether Mr Stack wrongly dismissed as objectively unreasonable Ms Poshteh’s assertion that the round window in the living room reminded her of her prison cell and as a result ignored her evidence of experiencing a panic attack when she visited the property. If that were the case, I should agree with Elias LJ that he misdirected himself. Ms Poshteh’s reaction to the round window, as evidenced by her panic attack, was an objective fact, even if it was irrational, and was a matter to be taken into account. However, reading para 45 as a whole in the context of the preceding paragraphs, I am not persuaded that Mr Stack did ignore Ms Poshteh’s reaction when reaching his conclusion . . What Mr Stack actually said was that he did not accept as objectively reasonable her assertion that the size or design of the windows in the living room were reminiscent of a prison cell or that the windows or layout of the room recreated the conditions of confinement or incarceration that were likely to have a significant impact on her mental health. The first of those observations cannot in my view be criticised, since the size and design of the windows were not on any objective view reminiscent of a prison cell. Whether the windows or layout of the room recreated conditions of confinement or incarceration that were likely to have a significant impact on Ms Poshteh’s mental health, on the other hand, was a matter of judgment which had to be determined by reference not only to the nature of the inciting stressor or her perception of the property but to the evidence as a whole . . ‘
Elias LJ dissented, focussing on the reasoning at the ‘key passage’ of the letter: ‘The premise is that unless the relevant inciting stressor was one which, objectively considered, ‘was reminiscent of a prison cell or . . recreated the conditions of confinement or incarceration’, which this property did not, the panic attacks could effectively be ignored or at least treated as sufficiently trivial as not to be likely to affect her mental health.’
He thought this approach was flawed: ‘If as a matter of fact the appellant would be likely to suffer panic or anxiety of such a nature and degree as to create a significant risk of damaging her mental health, it matters not whether it is an explicable or rational reaction. It would still be reasonable for the appellant to refuse the property, as in the El-Dinnaoui case. Alternatively, the officer might possibly have reasoned that absent an objectively explicable inciting stressor, any panic or anxiety induced by the premises would be minimal and unlikely to have an effect on the appellant’s mental health. If so, the analysis is still in my opinion flawed because there was no proper evidence to justify that inference. It is true that the medical evidence was to the effect that small and dark premises, obviously reminiscent of a prison cell, may well trigger the attacks, but that did not discount the possibility that the attacks may occur in other circumstances. In my judgment there was no basis for inferring simply from the nature of the inciting stressor that the attacks could not be significant enough to damage her mental health.’

Judges:

Moore-Bick, Elias, McCombe LJJ

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 711, [2015] HLR 36, [2015] CN 1222

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – El-Dinnaoui v Westminster City Council CA 20-Mar-2013
The appellant and his family sought rehousing. The appellant’s wife had a medically-confirmed history of anxiety due to fear of heights. They were offered a flat on the 16th floor. She became distressed on leaving after the inspection and collapsed . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 10-May-2017
The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.549775

El-Dinnaoui v Westminster City Council: CA 20 Mar 2013

The appellant and his family sought rehousing. The appellant’s wife had a medically-confirmed history of anxiety due to fear of heights. They were offered a flat on the 16th floor. She became distressed on leaving after the inspection and collapsed at the lift, and an ambulance had to be called.
Held: The council’s decision that this flat was suitable or reasonable for her to occupy was perverse and unlawful.

Judges:

Hughes LJ, David Richards J, Sir Alan Ward

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 231, [2013] HLR 23

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea CA 8-Jul-2015
The claimant sought housing under the homelessness provisions. She had refused a final offer accommodation n the grounds that it brought back memories of her prison cell in Iran, and which would exacerbate the post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety . .
Cited – Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 10-May-2017
The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.471915

Tsfayo v The United Kingdom: ECHR 14 Nov 2006

The applicant challenged the prodecures for deciding her appeal against the council’s refusal to pay backdated housing benefits. She complained that the availability of judicial review of the decision was not adequate.
Held: The system did not provide a fair system. The Board was not itself independent of the Council whose decision it looked at since members of the panel were representatives of the bodies who would pay the benefits, and the judicial review proceedings would be unable to look again at the findings of fact, and would therefore be an inadequate form of appeal: ‘While the High Court had the power to quash the decision if it considered, among other things, that there was no evidence to support the HBRB’s factual findings, or that its findings were plainly untenable, or that the HBRB had misunderstood or been ignorant of an established and relevant fact, it did not have jurisdiction to rehear the evidence or substitute its own views as to the applicant’s credibility. Thus, in the applicant’s case, there was never the possibility that the central issue would be determined by a tribunal that was independent of one of the parties to the dispute. It followed that there had been a violation of Article 6 ss 1.’

Judges:

Casadevall, P

Citations:

Times 23-Nov-2006, [2006] ECHR 981, 11111/04, [2006] ECHR 1158, [2007] ECHR 656, [2007] BLGR 1, [2007] HLR 19, (2009) 48 EHRR 18

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Ali v Birmingham City Council CA 7-Nov-2008
The Council said that it had discharged its duty to house the claimants after they had refused an offer of accommodation, and that decision had been reviewed. The claimant denied receiving a notice under the procedure. The court was asked whether . .
Cited – Wright and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another HL 21-Jan-2009
The claimants had been provisionally listed as ‘people considered unsuitable to work with vulnerable adults’ which meant that they could no longer work, but they said they were given no effective and speedy opportunity to object to the listing. . .
Cited – A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon SC 26-Nov-2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined.
Held: The claimants’ appeals . .
Cited – G, Regina (on The Application of) v X School and Others CA 20-Jan-2010
The claimant was a teaching assistant. A complaint had been made that he had kissed a boy having work experience at the school, but it had been decided that no criminal prosecution would follow. He sought judicial review of the school’s decision to . .
Cited – Tomlinson and Others v Birmingham City Council SC 17-Feb-2010
The appellant asked whether the statutory review of a housing authority’s decision on whether he was intentionally homeless was a determination of a civil right, and if so whether the review was of the appropriate standard. The claimant said that . .
Cited – King, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice CA 27-Mar-2012
In each case the prisoners challenged their transfer to cellular confinement or segregation within prison or YOI, saying that the transfers infringed their rights under Article 6, saying that domestic law, either in itself or in conjunction with . .
Cited – Ali v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Nov-2012
The applicant had sought and been accepted for emergency housing assistance, but having refused the accomodation offered, and the Authority said that it had fulfilled its duty to her. . .
See Also – Tsfayo v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Jul-2007
. .
Cited – Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods . .
Cited – Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 10-May-2017
The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.246674

Slater v London Borough of Lewisham: CA 12 Apr 2006

The applicant was heavily pregnant when she was offered a first floor one bedroomed flat. She rejected it.
Held: When a housing authority reviewed its decision on the applicant’s decision not to accept the accommodation offered, that review had two stages. Was the accommodation offered suitable, and, secondly, was the applicant’s rejection of the offer reasonable. The authority’s appeal was rejected.
Ward LJ described the decision-maker’s task: ‘In judging whether it was unreasonable to refuse such an offer, the decision-maker must have regard to all the personal characteristics of the applicant, her needs, her hopes and her fears and then taking account of those individual aspects, the subjective factors, ask whether it is reasonable, an objective test, for the applicant to accept. The test is whether a right-thinking local housing authority would conclude that it was reasonable that this applicant should have accepted the offer of this accommodation.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward, Sir Martin Nourse, The Right Honourable Sir Charles Mantell

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 394, Times 03-May-2006, [2006] HLR 37

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 193

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua HL 6-Jul-1995
The term ‘Accommodation’ in the Act was to be read to include short term lettings, and was not to be restricted to secure accommodation, and the loss of such accommodation can be counted as intentional homelessness. If a person who had been provided . .
Cited – London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Deugi CA 7-Mar-2006
The court considered whether a successful appeal against a local authority’s decision on the need for emergency housing should lead to the case being remitted to them for a further review. May LJ defined the question to be: ‘whether there was any . .
Cited – The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Rahanara Begum CA 11-Feb-2005
The applicant sought housing as a homeless person. Temporary accommodation was provided, and an offer of permanent accommodation was made but rejected. The council then sought possession of the temporary accommodation. The applicant responded that . .
Cited – Wilson-Webb v The Kensington and Chelsea RLBC 16-Jun-1998
(County Court) . .
Cited – Warsame and Warsame v London Borough of Hounslow CA 25-Jun-1999
The appellants refused the authority’s offer of accommodation under Part VI of the 1996 Act, saying it was not suitable. After the authority had informed them that if they did not accept the offer, the authority’s duty to house them would cease, . .
Cited – London Borough of Newham v Khatun, Zeb and Iqbal CA 24-Feb-2004
The council made offers of accommodation which were rejected as inappropriate by the proposed tenants.
Held: The council was given a responsibility to act reasonably. It was for them, not the court to make that assessment subject only to . .
Cited – Crawley Borough Council v Bliss CA 22-Feb-2000
A local authority refused the applicants application for emergency housing as a homeless person. On the review of that decision the authority concluded that she did have priority need, but then decided that the application should be refused because . .

Cited by:

Cited – Ravichandran and Another v London Borough of Lewisham CA 2-Jul-2010
The claimant appealed against an order confirming a review of the decision that the local authority owed no futher duty to her under section 193. She had rejected the house offered as unsuitable for medical reasons.
Held: The tenant’s appeal . .
Cited – Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 10-May-2017
The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.241955

Calabar Properties Ltd v Stitcher: CA 1983

The landlord had failed in his duty to repair. One tenant’s health suffered because of the damp, and they had to rent other premises.
Held: The landlord has only a reasonable time to effect repairs once he has been given notice of the need for them. Damages for breach of a covenant to repair are to compensate the tenant for inconvenience and discomfort of occupying premises in disrepair, not for diminution in rental value.

Judges:

Stephenson LJ

Citations:

[1984] 1 WLR 287, [1983] 3 All ER 759

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Morris v Liverpool City Council CA 1988
The court was concerned with the implied statutory obligations of repair on the landlord: ‘It is common ground that the door and frame of the flat were part of the structure and exterior of the flat within the meaning of the implied statutory . .
Cited – Niazi Services Ltd v Johannes Marinus Henricus Van Der Loo CA 10-Feb-2004
The tenant counterclaimed an action by the landlord for rent saying the property had not been repaired under the landlord’s covenant. The water supply had for 33 months been weak, leading to only a trickle of water being available, and there had . .
Cited – Wallace and others v Manchester City Council CA 23-Jul-1998
Damages payable to a tenant for a landlord’s failure to repair whilst the tenant remained in the property were not separate damages for discomfort and diminution in rental value since these amounted to the same thing: ‘for periods when the tenant . .
Cited – Hussain v Mehlman CC 5-Mar-1992
(County Court) The defendant landlord granted the plaintiff a three year assured shorthold tenancy. He now appealed a finding that he was in breach of an implied covenant to maintain the space heating, and otherwise. The tenant had returned the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Damages

Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.187738

Brown v Nash and Ambrose: CA 1948

The statutory tenant was sent to prison but left his mistress and children in the premises and subsequently the mistress and children left the premises.
Held: ‘We are of the opinion that a non-occupying tenant prima facie forfeits his status as a statutory tenant. But what is meant by ‘non-occupying’? The term clearly cannot cover every tenant who, for however short a time or how ever necessary the purpose or with whatever intention in regards to returning, absents himself from the demised premises. To retain possession or occupation for the purpose of retaining protection the tenant cannot be compelled to spend 24 hours in all weathers under his own roof for 365 days in the year. Clearly, for instance, the tenant of a London house who spends his weekends in the country or his long vacation in Scotland does not necessarily cease to be in occupation. Nevertheless, absence, may be sufficiently prolonged or unintermittent to compel the inference, prima facie, of cessor of possession or occupation. The question is one of fact and of degree. Assume an absence sufficiently prolonged to have this effect: the legal result seems to us to be as follows: (1) The onus is then on the tenant to repel the presumption that his possession has ceased. (2) In order to repel it he must at all events establish a de facto intention on his part to return after his absence. (3) But we are of the opinion that neither in principle nor on the authorities can this be enough. To suppose that he can absent himself for 5 or 10 years or more and retain possession and his protected status simply by proving an inward intention to return after so protracted an absence would be to frustrate the spirit and policy of the Acts …. (4) Not withstanding an absence so protracted the authorities suggest that its effect may be averted if he couples and clothes his inward intention with some formal, outward and visible sign of it; that is, installs in the premises some caretaker or representative, be it a relative or not, with a status of a licensee and with the function of observing the premises for his own ultimate homecoming. There will then, at all events, be someone to profit by the housing accommodation involved which will not stand empty. It may be the same results can be secured by leaving on the premises as a deliberate symbol of occupation, furniture ….. apart from authority in principle, possession in fact (for it is with possession in fact and not with possession in law that we are here concerned) requires not merely an ‘animus possidendi’ but a ‘corpus possessionis’, namely, some visible state of affairs in which the ‘animus possidendi’ finds expression. (5) If the caretaker …. leaves or the furniture is removed from the premises, otherwise than quite temporarily, we are of the opinion that the protection, artificially prolonged by their presence, ceases whether the tenant wills or desires such removal or not.’

Judges:

Asquith LJ

Citations:

[1948] 2 KB 247

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Ujima Housing Association v Ansah and Another CA 17-Oct-1997
The tenant had created a sub tenancy, the result of which was that he no longer had any right to enter upon the property unless the sub-tenant surrendered his lease.
Held: The tenant could not be said properly to be in occupation of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.220478

Henderson v Law: CA 1985

Griffiths LJ discussed the bringing of cases for possession under the summary procedure provided by Order 113: ‘There will obviously be cases in which, although proceedings are started by way of a summary procedure it quickly becomes apparent that a substantial issue has to be tried. If it was apparent to the applicant that a serious issue was bound to arise as to whether a tenancy or a holding ever existed, no doubt the judge would regard the use of the summary procedure as inappropriate, or even in an extreme case as an abuse of the process, and dismiss the application; but I would expect such cases to be rare, because I would not anticipate that solicitors would seek to steal a march by using an inappropriate procedure. From time to time there are bound to be cases such as this where, from the applicant’s point of view, an unexpected issue surfaces which raises the question of a tenancy or a holding over. In such cases, the judge must exercise his discretion and decide whether it is wiser to continue the summary hearing, or to adjourn it for a further hearing after the parties have had a chance to reconsider the position, or possibly to dismiss the application and leave the applicant to have the issues determined in a subsequent action.’

Judges:

Griffiths LJ

Citations:

(1985) 17 HLR 237

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Crancour Ltd v Da Silvaesa and Another CA 26-Feb-1986
The plaintiff sought possession of two rooms in a house occupied by the defendants separately. The agreements stated that they were licences. The agreements excluded the occupiers between 10:30am and noon on each day. The occupiers claimed to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.259697

Manchester City Council v Pinnock: CA 31 Jul 2009

The court considered the status in law of ‘demoted tenants’, those who had been secure social housing tenants, but who had only limited security after being found to have behaved anti-socially. The tenant had been refused an opportunity by the county court judge to challenge the conclusions as to fact found by the local authority.
Held: The tenant’s appeal failed. Stanley Burnton LJ said that ‘Section 143D of the 1996 Act restricts the county court to considering whether the procedure under sections 143E and 143F has been followed. If the court concludes the procedure has not been followed, it will not make an order for possession. If it has been followed, it must make the order. I emphasise the word procedure. The court’s review is limited to matters of procedure, and the county court cannot review the substance or rationality of the landlord’s decision, or whether or not it is consistent with the tenant’s or other occupiers’ Convention rights.’

Judges:

Mummery, Lloyd, Stanley Burnton LLJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 852, [2010] 1 WLR 713, [2009] 32 EG 68, [2010] HLR 7, [2009] BLGR 869, [2010] PTSR 423

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 143D, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Salford City Council v Mullen CA 30-Mar-2010
The court considered the status of decisions to commence proceedings for possession by local authorities against tenants not protected under any statutory scheme. The tenants, on introductory tenancies and under the homelessness regime, argued that . .
Cited – Hall and Others v Mayor of London (on Behalf of The Greater London Authority) CA 16-Jul-2010
The appellants sought leave to appeal against an order for possession of Parliament Square on which the claimants had been conducting a demonstration (‘the Democracy Village’).
Held: Leave was refused save for two appellants whose cases were . .
Appeal from – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
Appeal from – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 9-Feb-2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.368598

Odhams Walk Residents’ Management Ltd v Westminster City Council: Admn 13 Jul 2009

Challenge by way of judicial review to the policy of the Westminster City Council that only studio-sized accommodation will be made available in future to housing management organisations like the claimant to offer to their staff.

Judges:

Cranston J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1712 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Planning, Housing

Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.361464

Zehentner v Austria: ECHR 16 Jul 2009

ECHR The applicant’s apartment was subject to a judicial sale for non-payment of debt. She was ill, and did not participate in the sale. The local law had time limits for challenging a judicial sale, designed to protect the right of a bona fide purchaser and to ensure legal certainty.
Held: Neither interest proposed was sufficient to outweigh the considerations of an applicant without legal capacity, dispossessed of her home without being able to participate effectively in the proceedings, and without any possibility to have the proportionality of the measure determined by the courts. For the lack of procedural safeguards there had been a violation of Article 8.

Citations:

20082/02, [2009] ECHR 1119

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Coombes, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another Admn 8-Mar-2010
The landlord council brought proceedings for possession. The tenant (C) had remained in possession after his mother’s death, but enjoyed no second statutory succession. He had lived there since 1954 when he was six. C sought a declaration of . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
Cited – London Borough of Hounslow v Powell, Leeds City Council v Hall etc SC 23-Feb-2011
In each case the tenant occupied the property as his home, but was not a secure tenant of the local authority. The Court was asked whether, in granting a possession order in such a case, the court was obliged to consider the proportionality of the . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 9-Feb-2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . .
Cited – ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham SC 12-Nov-2014
The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under . .
Cited – McDonald v McDonald and Others SC 15-Jun-2016
Her parents had bought a house and granted tenancies to their adult daughter (the appellant), who suffered a personality disorder. They became unable to repay the mortgage. Receivers were appointed but the appellant fell into arrears with the rent. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.352345

London and Quadrant Housing Trust v Weaver, Regina; Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening: CA 18 Jun 2009

The Trust appealed against a finding that in terminating an assured tenancy transferred to it from a local authority, it had acted as a hybrid public authority and was subject to controls under the 1998 Act.
Held: (Rix LJ dissenting). The appeal failed. When dealing with social tenants, the trust exercised a public law function. This was not limted to properties purchased with public funds, but was limited to social tenants. It did not extend to ordinary tenants paying market rate rents.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rix, Lord Collins of Mapesbury and Lord Justice Elias

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 587, Times 26-Aug-2009, [2010] 1 WLR 363, [2009] WLR (D) 202

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Weaver, Regina (on the Application of) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust Admn 24-Jun-2008
An assured tenant sought to challenge a possession order made for rent arrears. He said that as a public body the landlord had a duty under human rights law to pursue all posssible alternate solutions before seeking possession.
Held: The . .
Leave to appeal – Weaver v London Quadrant Housing Trust CA 17-Feb-2009
The respondent sought leave to appeal against a finding that as a registered social landlord it was exercising a public function and was a hybrid public authority.
Held: Leave was granted. A protective costs order was made for the respondent . .

Cited by:

Cited – Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening) SC 30-Jun-2010
The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347112

London District Properties Management Ltd and Others v Goolamy and Another: Admn 16 Jun 2009

The court was asked: ‘Does section 13(1)(a) of the Housing Act 1988 have the effect of enabling a landlord to seek to increase the rent payable under a statutory periodic tenancy beyond the levels contemplated in a rent review clause in the assured tenancy that preceded it, even though that clause purports to govern the position during the currency of both the assured tenancy and any subsequent statutory periodic tenancy?’

Judges:

Burnett J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1367 (Admin), [2009] NPC 77, [2009] 2 P and CR DG17, [2010] 1 P and CR 1, [2009] L and TR 25, [2010] 1 WLR 307, [2009] 38 EG 110

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988 13(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.346924

Freeman v London Borough of Islington: CA 11 Jun 2009

A claim was made for a statutory succession to an assured tenancy. The judge had found that the appellant was occupying the flat at the time of the death of her father (the tenant) as her only home, but that she had not ‘resided with’ him throughout the previous year. This was so despite the fact that she had actually stayed in the flat with him full-time during that year.
Held: The focus was on the statutory words ‘resided with’, looking at the claimant’s actions and ascertaining whether they exhibited a ‘home-making intention’ rather than merely staying with the tenant for a limited time and a limited purpose.

Judges:

Waller, Longmore, Jacob LJJ

Citations:

[2009] L and TR 23, [2009] 24 EG 85, [2011] PTSR 1695, [2010] HLR 6, [2009] EWCA Civ 536

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 87

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham SC 12-Nov-2014
The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.346824

Regina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett: Admn 13 May 1998

The risk of an accident from a steep staircase to a disabled tenant was not a statutory nuisance. The possibility of an accident is not the same as a source of injury to health. Buxton LJ: ‘The limitation of the reach of this Statute to disease and ill-health is too long standing and deep rooted to be susceptible now to any different interpretation.’

Judges:

Buxton LJ

Citations:

Times 27-May-1998, Gazette 10-Jun-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 534, [1999] 31 HLR 1102

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 79(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett CA 26-Feb-1999
A steep staircase in a house which might lead to an accident was not because of that fact a statutory nuisance. It was not directly prejudicial to health as required by the Act for liability. . .
Appealed to – Regina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett CA 26-Feb-1999
A steep staircase in a house which might lead to an accident was not because of that fact a statutory nuisance. It was not directly prejudicial to health as required by the Act for liability. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett CA 26-Feb-1999
A steep staircase in a house which might lead to an accident was not because of that fact a statutory nuisance. It was not directly prejudicial to health as required by the Act for liability. . .
Appeal from – Regina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett CA 26-Feb-1999
A steep staircase in a house which might lead to an accident was not because of that fact a statutory nuisance. It was not directly prejudicial to health as required by the Act for liability. . .
Cited – Vella v London Borough of Lambeth Admn 14-Nov-2005
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision to serve an abatement notice in respect of premises where the normal noise incidents of living were heard in neighbouring flats, which notices were to be abated by noise insulation.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.138655

Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association: CA 19 Mar 2008

Judges:

Pill LJ, Sedley LJ, Longmore LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 196

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 85(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Knowsley Housing Trust v White; Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington; Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association HL 10-Dec-2008
The House considered situations where a secure or assured tenancy had been made subject to a suspended possession order and where despite the tenant failing to comply with the conditions, he had been allowed to continue in occupation.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.266391

Regina v Wandsworth Borough Council Ex Parte Crooks (And Six Other Applications): QBD 30 Mar 1995

Local Authority may re-house in private sector on an assured shorthold tenancy which was expected to be renewed under normal circumstances.

Citations:

Independent 30-Mar-1995, Times 12-Apr-1995

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 65(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.88242

Wandsworth London Borough Council v Webb: CA 12 Nov 2008

The tenant appealed against a possession order granted because of her son who had been accused but acquitted three times of breaching an anti-social behaviour order. She said that her son had left home.
Held: The judge had been wrong in principle to take account of three unproven prosecutions.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Sedley and Lord Justice Wilson

Citations:

Times 05-Jan-2009, [2008] EWCA Civ 1643

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.317949

Doran v Liverpool City Council: CA 3 Mar 2009

The claimant sought to set aside an order requiring him to give up possession of a caravan pitch held under the 1968 Act.
Held: The decision to serve a notice to quit which was reasonable on the facts known to the local authority at the time could not be invalidated retrospectively by reference to facts subsequently established or discovered. The appeal failed.

Judges:

Jacob, Toulson, Aikens LJJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 146, [2009] 1 WLR 2365

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Caravan Sites Act 1968

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Doherty and others v Birmingham City Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local authority can obtain a summary order for possession against an occupier of a site which it owns and has been used for many years as a gipsy and travellers’ caravan site. His licence to occupy the site has come to . .
Cited – Smith (on Behalf of the Gypsy Council) v Buckland CA 12-Dec-2007
The defendants appealed an order requiring them to leave caravan pitches managed by the council.
Held: The court referred to the absence of procedural safeguards to which, in view of their vulnerable position, gipsies were entitled. . .
Cited – Wandsworth London Borough Council v Winder HL 1985
Rent demands were made by a local authority landlord on one of its tenants. The local authority, using its powers under the Act, resolved to increase rents generally. The tenant refused to pay the increased element of the rent. He argued that the . .
Cited – Connors v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-May-2004
The applicant gypsies had initially been permitted to locate their caravan on a piece of land owned by a local authority, but their right of occupation was brought to an end because the local authority considered that they were committing a . .
Cited – McLellan v Bracknell Forest Borough Council; Reigate Borough Council v Benfield and Another CA 16-Oct-2001
The tenant was issued with a notice to quit for unpaid rent, within the first year, during an ‘introductory tenancy.’ She sought judicial review on the basis that the reduced security of tenure infringed her human rights.
Held: Review was . .

Cited by:

Cited – McGlynn v Welwyn Hatfield District Council CA 1-Apr-2009
The appellant was a non-secure tenant of the respondent. It had served a notice to quit and he now appealed against an order for possession on public law grounds.
Held: There had been a delay between the issue of the notice to quit and the . .
Cited – Central Bedfordshire Council v Housing Action Zone Ltd, Taylor and Others; Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government intervening CA 23-Jun-2009
The authority had granted a lease to a housing society who had in turn granted the occupants’ leases. A successor then revoked the head lease. The occupiers appealed against possession orders, saying that they had come to acquire article 8 rights in . .
Cited – Barber v London Borough of Croydon CA 11-Feb-2010
The tenant who suffered learning and behavioural difficulties appealed against an order for possession of his council flat. He had become aggressive with the caretaker. The council sought possession, and he defended the claim saying that the council . .
Cited – Salford City Council v Mullen CA 30-Mar-2010
The court considered the status of decisions to commence proceedings for possession by local authorities against tenants not protected under any statutory scheme. The tenants, on introductory tenancies and under the homelessness regime, argued that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.311770

Markozoff v Craig: 1939

The landlord sought possession of the defendant’s tenancy y saying that the alternative accommodation offered was suitable.
Held: The accommodation was not suitable. The tenant needed space to entertain business acquaintances, and the new property offered no garden for his child to play in.

Citations:

(1949) 93 Sol Jo 693

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.260331

Haniff v Robinson: 1992

The only way that a landlord may properly secure possession of property subject to a statutory tenancy against the wishes of the tenant is by first obtaining a possession order and then by executing a warrant for possession.

Citations:

[1992] 3 WLR 875

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.260333

London City Properties Ltd v Goodman: 1978

The landlord sought to recover possession of the property subject to a protected tenancy on the basis that suitable alternative accomodation was available.
Held: The tenant’s own other property could be a possible suitable alternative.

Citations:

Unreported, 01-Jan-78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.260330

Cosic v Croatia: ECHR 15 Jan 2009

The applicant teacher was provided a flat by her school, which it in had leased from the Yugoslavian Army. That lease expired in 1990. She remained, paying rent to the school. Ultimately the Croatian State, which had assumed ownership of Yugoslavian Army property, obtained an order of possession from the Municipal Court. The basis was that the lease had expired so the applicant had no lawful entitlement to occupy the flat. She had no other place to stay.
Held: The local Court had considered only that the applicant’s occupation had no legal basis, and did not consider the proportionality of the steps taken. The Convention required that the interference with an applicant’s right and respect for her home be not only based on the law but also be proportionate, under Article 8(2), to the legitimate aim pursued, regard being had to the particular circumstances of the case. The court reiterated paragraph 50 of McCann. The applicant had not been given adequate procedural safeguards and there was a violation of Article 8. The alleged violation of Article 6 was manifestly ill founded.

Judges:

Christos Rozakis, P

Citations:

28261/06, [2009] ECHR 80, (2011) 52 EHRR 39

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8(2)

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Cited – McCann v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-May-2008
The applicant and his wife were secure joint tenants of a house of a local authority under section 82. Their marriage broke down, and the applicant’s wife moved out of the house with the two children of the marriage. She returned after obtaining a . .

Cited by:

Cited – Coombes, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another Admn 8-Mar-2010
The landlord council brought proceedings for possession. The tenant (C) had remained in possession after his mother’s death, but enjoyed no second statutory succession. He had lived there since 1954 when he was six. C sought a declaration of . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
Cited – London Borough of Hounslow v Powell, Leeds City Council v Hall etc SC 23-Feb-2011
In each case the tenant occupied the property as his home, but was not a secure tenant of the local authority. The Court was asked whether, in granting a possession order in such a case, the court was obliged to consider the proportionality of the . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 9-Feb-2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . .
Cited – Sims v Dacorum Borough Council CA 24-Jan-2013
Husband and wife had been joint tenants of the council. On the breakdown of the marriage, W gave notice to quit. H defended the council’s possession action, saying that it was an infringement of his human rights for him to lose his tenancy and home. . .
Cited – McDonald v McDonald and Others SC 15-Jun-2016
Her parents had bought a house and granted tenancies to their adult daughter (the appellant), who suffered a personality disorder. They became unable to repay the mortgage. Receivers were appointed but the appellant fell into arrears with the rent. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.280304

Eastleigh Borough Council v Walsh: HL 28 Mar 1985

The defendant had been allowed into the property under the homelessness legislation. The authority now sought possession. They said he had a licence only, but he claimed to have a secure tenancy.
Held: The authority had made a mistake, and the defedant was a secure tenant. The letter offering him the property, and his receipt for the keys, had said that a tenancy was being granted.

Judges:

Lord Scarman, Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Bridge of Harwich, Lord Brightman, Lord Templeman

Citations:

[1985] UKHL 12, [1985] 1 WLR 525, (1985) 17 HLR 392, 83 LGR 525, [1985] 2 All ER 112

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1980, Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.279754