Housing cases of interest
Andy Lane sets out the recent housing cases of interest over the last three months.
Anti-social Behaviour
Joshua James Murray v Chief Constable of Lancashire [2015] EWCA Civ 1174
A judge had been entitled to refuse to discharge or vary an interim injunction imposed on an alleged member of a gang under the Policing and Crime Act 2009 s.34. Once the threshold issue was established, namely that there was a "serious question to be tried" as to whether the individual was a member of the gang responsible for violence as outlined in the evidence, the judge was not confined to restraining particular conduct attributed to the individual but was entitled to impose or continue orders restraining him from engaging in conduct attributable to the gang as a whole.
R v Mohan Uddin & 8 Ors [2015] EWCA Crim 1918
Anti-social behaviour orders imposed on nine men following their convictions for affray or violent disorder were flawed in several respects. Among other things, the men had come to court not knowing the case they had to meet.
R (on the application of John Carney) v North Lincolnshire Council QBD (Admin) (Lloyd Jones LJ, Supperstone J) 27/01/2016
A judge had been entitled to find that an anti-social behaviour order prohibiting an appellant from engaging in any behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to any local authority employee for five years was necessary and proportionate. Local authority employees should be able to carry out their functions without being subjected to threatening behaviour.
Bedroom Tax
R (on the application of (1) Susan Rutherford (2) Paul Rutherford (3) Warren Todd (By his litigation friend Susan Rutherford) v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions : R (on the application of A) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions (Respondent) & Equality & Human Rights Commission (Intervenor) [2016] EWCA Civ 29
The court considered the lawfulness of the scheme under the Housing Benefit (Amendment) Regulations 2012, which reduced housing benefit for those who were under-occupying their homes. The Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 reg.B13 discriminated against families with disabled children who required an additional bedroom for overnight carers. It also discriminated against female victims of domestic violence living in accommodation adapted under the sanctuary scheme. There was no objective justification for that discrimination.
Council Tax
R (on the application of Mark Logan) v Havering London Borough Council [2015] EWHC 3193 (Admin)
The defendant local authority's council tax reduction scheme, under which those eligible for council tax support because of a lack of resources had their council tax reduced by 85%, did not breach ECHR art.14 taken in conjunction with Protocol 1 art.1.
Terence Ewing (Claimant) v Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court (Defendant) & London Borough of Camden (Interested Party) [2015] EWHC 3788 (Admin)
An order for the costs of obtaining a liability order to enforce payment of unpaid council tax charges was quashed where there had been no evidence before the magistrates' court that the costs claimed represented costs reasonably incurred by the local authority in obtaining the liability order.
Harminder Singh Soor v Redbridge London Borough Council [2016] EWHC 77 (Admin)
Court allow appeal by way of case stated as suspended committal order allowed for council tax payments over too long a period
Disrepair
Mansing Moorjani v Durban Estates Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1252
Where a residential lessee claimed to have suffered loss arising from the lessor's breach of its repairing and insuring obligations, which had caused disrepair to his flat, the loss lay in the impairment of the amenity value of his proprietary interest in the flat, of which discomfort, inconvenience and distress were only symptoms. Therefore, the fact that he had chosen to live elsewhere for reasons unconnected with the disrepair was not fatal to his claim.
Homelessness & Allocation
R (on the application of A) v Ealing London Borough Council (2015) QBD (Admin) (Patterson J) 16/12/2015
Local housing authority decisions refusing to put an applicant on the housing register were quashed as they had been based on a housing allocation policy that had been held to be unlawful. There had been no grounds to stay the judicial review of those decisions pending an application for permission to appeal against the decision that the policy was unlawful; an interim policy could be introduced and there would be no irremediable harm if no stay was granted.
R (on the application of Omar) v Wandsworth London Borough Council (2015) QBD (Admin) (Ouseley J) 11/11/2015
A local authority had not erred by refusing to provide interim accommodation to a homeless woman suffering from asthma who was challenging an adverse housing decision. Her condition did not make her a vulnerable person or significantly worse off than others in a similar situation.
Terryann Samuels v Birmingham City Council [2015] EWCA Civ 1051
When assessing whether accommodation had been affordable for the purpose of determining whether a tenant had become intentionally homeless by accruing rent arrears, there had to be an assessment of income and relevant expenses as a whole. Benefits income had no special status in that assessment.
Mirga v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions : Samin v Westminster City Council [2016] UKSC 1
The denial of income support and housing assistance to two economically inactive EU citizens, resulting from the application of domestic legislation, did not give rise to a breach of their rights under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
R (on the application of Tanushi) v (1) City of Westminster (2) Hillington London Borough Council QBD (Admin) (Timothy Dutton QC) 22/01/2016
An individual was granted a continued order for temporary accommodation where two local authorities agreed that there was a duty to house her, but disagreed as to which of them had accepted that duty.
Licensing
London Borough of Newham v Osmar [2015] EWHC 3800 (Admin)
A magistrates' court's refusal to recall a witness to give live evidence in a Part 3 Housing Act 2004 licence case on matters which had only arisen during the course of the trial was unsatisfactory and potentially led to a substantial injustice.
Thanet District Council v Grant (2015) DC (Beatson LJ, Wilkie J) 29/10/2015
A magistrates' court had been wrong to find that the obligation on a local housing authority under the Housing Act 2004 s.85(4) to take all reasonable steps to secure that applications for licences were made in respect of houses in a designated additional licensing area was a duty owed to an individual landlord, and that a failure to comply with that duty gave rise to a reasonable excuse under s.95(4) for his failing to obtain a licence.
Possession
Garwood v Bolter & Anor [2015] EWHC 3619 (Ch)
A judge had been entitled to dismiss a trustee in bankruptcy's application in accelerated possession proceedings for orders for vacant possession and sale of three houses in the bankrupt's estate where, although notices to terminate the tenancies had been given under the Housing Act 1988 s.21, the trustee had not brought separate pleaded possession claims against the occupiers.
Rent Assessment
Graham Francis Bacon v Mountview Estates PLC [2015] UKUT 588 (LC)
A tenant who signed up to a new tenancy in 1993 after enjoying a continuous series of periodic or statutory tenancies over a 10-year period in various properties belonging to the same landlord continued by virtue of the Housing Act 1988 s.34(1)(b) to be a regulated tenant protected by the Rent Act 1977. On the evidence, that was how the landlord had treated him. The First-tier Tribunal had been wrong to assume that he was an assured tenant and had had no jurisdiction to assess his rent under s.13 of the 1988 Act.
Social Security
Mirga v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions : Samin v Westminster City Council [2016] UKSC 1
The denial of income support and housing assistance to two economically inactive EU citizens, resulting from the application of domestic legislation, did not give rise to a breach of their rights under the TFEU.
Miscellaneous
Bokrosova v Lambeth London Borough Council [2015] EWHC 3386 (Admin)
A local authority which had decided to redevelop a housing estate had acted unlawfully when it stopped consulting with the residents about the alternative option of refurbishing the properties.
Andy Lane is a barrister at Cornerstone Barristers. He can be contacted on 020 7242 4986 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
