Social housing case bulletin
Anne Hayward and Jonathan Hulley provide an update on the latest cases affecting the social housing sector.
Edwards v Kumarasamy [2015] EWCA Civ 20, Court of Appeal, 28 January 2015
Landlord and tenant – Defects – Liability
The Appellant tripped over a paving stone outside the flat he rented from the Respondent, injuring his knee. The issue was whether the Respondent, who was a long leaseholder of one flat in a block, was liable for the Appellant’s injuries. DDJ Gilman held that the paved area between the front door and the car park was part of the exterior of the flat and had awarded the Appellant damages, a decision reversed in the High Court. However, a new point had also been raised; namely whether the Respondent was liable under the extended covenant implied by s11(1A) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The High Court held that he was not, because it was a precondition to liability that notice of the defect was given and none had been. The Court of Appeal disagreed and allowed the appeal.
Hussain v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2015] EWCA Civ 14, Court of Appeal, 20 January 2015
Housing – Homelessness – Anti-social behaviour
The Respondent lived in a house rented from a housing association in the borough covered by the Appellant Council. She became a victim of racial harassment and serious anti-social behaviour from the relative of a neighbour. She reported the problems to the housing association and the police, but they felt unable to help because she would not make an official complaint. The Respondent applied under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996, claiming that she was homeless because it was unreasonable for her to have to continue in occupation. In particular, she relied on s177(1), which applies where an applicant is at risk of violence. A Council review had decided that she was not homeless, a decision later overturned. The appeal was dismissed and the Council was instructed to conduct a fresh review of its decision.
R (on the application of C, T, M & U) v London Borough of Southwark [2014] EWHC 3983, Administrative Court, 28 November 2014
Local authorities duties and powers – Accommodation – Children
In this case, the first Claimant was an over-stayer and mother of the other Claimants, all of whom were dependent children born in the UK. The claim challenged the lawfulness of the type of accommodation and level of support provided to the family by the Defendant local authority under s17 Children Act 1989 and the Human Rights Act 1988. The Claimants sought an order quashing the Defendant's assessments of the needs of the children and a declaration that the support and accommodation provided was unlawful. The Claimant also requested an assessment of damages as a result of the Defendant's failures. The claim was dismissed.
London Borough of Ealing & ors v Notting Hill Housing Trust & anor [2015] EWHC 161, Administrative Court, 29 January 2015
Council Tax – Charitable status – Homelessness
This appeal by three local authorities concerned the application of an exemption from council tax. The exemption is contained within the Council Tax (Exempt Dwellings) Order 1992, Article 3, Class B, which states: Class B: a dwelling owned by a body established for charitable purposes only, which is unoccupied and has been so for a period of less than 6 months and was last occupied in furtherance of the objects of the charity. It was held that where an exemption was sought for the void periods between lettings, the last tenant had to be shown to have been a beneficiary of social housing. Proof was required to show that four conditions had been met. Two of the cases were adjudged to have met the required standard of evidence, but one did not and for that case the appeal was allowed.
R. (on the application of Hillsden) v Epping Forest District Council [2015] EWHC 98, Administrative Court, 7 January 2015
Housing – Allocation scheme – Qualifying criteria
This application for judicial review challenged a decision of the Defendant Council not to consider whether or not the Claimant's circumstances were exceptional and that she should be treated as eligible for an allocation despite not fulfilling the residency criteria in the Defendant's housing allocations scheme. Despite being on the allocation list for three years, the Claimant was notified that she was no longer a qualifying person under a revised allocation scheme and thus ineligible to be listed on the housing register. All of the Claimant's challenges were rejected and the application for judicial review dismissed.
Rosslyn Mansions Tenants’ Association v Winstonworth Limited [2015] UKUT 0011, Lands Chamber, 13 January 2015
Landlord and tenant – Service charges – Certificate of recognition
This was an appeal from a decision of the First-tier Tribunal which determined that a certificate of recognition in favour of the Appellant, under s29 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, should not be given. The Tribunal had erred because it had treated as irrelevant a factor which was relevant; had accepted that the result should be a refusal on the wrong basis; and did not consider whether the history of complaints weighed in support of the giving of a certificate. The appeal was allowed and the application remitted to be considered again at a hearing at which each party would be entitled to produce evidence and make representations.
Rydon Maintenance Ltd v Affinity Sutton Housing Ltd, Queen’s Bench Division, 15 January 2015
Contract – Adjudication – Enforcement
The Applicant applied for summary judgment to enforce an adjudicator's decision against the Defendant. The parties had entered into a maintenance contract on an amended JCT standard form of measured term contract which was later varied to another standard form of contract, which provided for disputes to be resolved under the Construction Industry Council Model Adjudication Procedure. The Defendant argued that the adjudicator had failed to follow the correct procedure and had failed to give each party an equal and reasonable opportunity to present its case. The judge ruled there was no apparent bias and that both parties had been dealt with fairly. The Claimant was entitled to summary judgment to enforce the adjudicator's decision.
No transcript currently available.
Vidler v Ellenore, Queen’s Bench Division, 13 January 2015
Housing – Repossession – Chattels
The Claimant’s property had been repossessed by her mortgagee. The property was sold and any remaining chattels were bagged up and, when they were not collected, were disposed of. The Claimant continued to allege that the conveyance had been to some extent dishonest, to the point that the Defendant had requested the making of a civil restraint order. The court was not satisfied that the Claimant would refrain from arguing about the conveyance of the property and felt it was appropriate to make a limited civil restraint order precluding her from formally questioning of its legality. The order would not prevent the Claimant from pursuing any case relating to the disappearance of her chattels.
No transcript currently available.
Anne Hayward is Head of Social Housing and Jonathan Hulley is Head of Housing Management at Clarke Willmott. Anne can be reached on 0845 209 1141 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., while Jonathan can be contacted on or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
