The court emphasised the need not merely to identify the relevant factors that weigh in each direction when considering whether to make an order for possession in a nuisance case, but to explain clearly why it is or is not proportionate to interfere with a Convention right in order to address a pressing social need.
Judges:
Sedley LJ
Citations:
(2001) 33 HLR 72, [2001] EWCA Civ 944
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Coates and others v South Buckinghamshire District Council CA 22-Oct-2004
The local authority had required the applicants to remove their mobile homes from land. They complained that the judge had failed properly to explain how he had reached his decision as to the proportionality of the pressing social need, and the . .
Cited – Knowsley Housing Trust v McMullen CA 9-May-2006
The defendant tenant appealed an order for possession of her flat. She was disabled and living with her 19 year old son. He had been made subject to an anti-social behaviour order. The court had found that she could have required him to leave. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Housing, Human Rights
Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.217984
