The PSED and claims for possession
John Murray considers a recent case in which a court scrutinised an alleged breach of the Public Sector Equality Duty in the context of a claim for possession.
The Equality Act 2010 prohibits discrimination, harassment and victimisation against people with protected characteristics. The Act protects a number of characteristics including, but not limited to: age, disability, race, religion and sex.
Under s.149 of the Equality Act 2010, a public authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to: eliminate the aforementioned prohibited conduct; advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic; and foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. A person who is not a public authority, but who exercises public functions, must also have due regard to these matters.
In Guinness Partnership Limited v England, Ms England occupied the property of Guinness Partnership under an assured tenancy. In July 2017, Ms England received a suspended sentence for the possession of a knife in a public place. She also threatened an employee of Guinness Partnership via telephone. As a result, Guinness Partnership sought possession of the property under the Housing Act 1988 by relying on Grounds: 7A (the tenant has been convicted of a serious offence in the locality of the dwelling house); 12 (any obligation of the tenancy has been breached) and 14 (the tenant has been guilty of conduct causing a nuisance to persons in the locality). Ms England defended the claim for possession on the grounds that Guinness Partnership had failed to comply with the Public Sector Equality Duty and had failed to take into account the fact that she suffered from depression, anxiety and panic attacks.
Guinness Partnership contended that it had complied with the Public Sector Equality Duty by carrying out an Equality Act assessment and by considering the impact that an eviction would have on Ms England. In carrying out this assessment, Guinness Partnership concluded that seeking possession was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
However, it was held by the Court that Guinness Partnership had breached the Public Sector Equality Duty for a number of reasons. Firstly, the Equality Act assessment had rejected medical evidence that Ms England suffered from a mental health disability and failed to provide any justification for this rejection. A further assessment simply stated that she might be disabled, but did not consider the disability any further. In addition, the assessment did not take into account evidence provided by Ms England showing that she was the victim of racist abuse and harassment from her neighbour. She claimed that this was the reason that she took the knife outside of the dwelling, resulting in her suspended sentence. The Court also noted that Guinness Partnership had not considered the impact that the eviction would have on Ms England’s son, who suffered from autism.
In addition to the failings of the impact assessment, Guinness Partnership had also breached a number of its own policies. One such policy required Guinness Partnership, upon the complaint of racial abuse, to consider whether the complainant required support. This consideration had not taken place. Another policy required Guinness Partnership to consider whether alternatives to a claim for possession would be more appropriate. However, this consideration had not taken place either. As a result, the claim for possession was dismissed by the Court.
This judgment clearly illustrates the importance of complying, (and demonstrating that compliance) with the Public Sector Equality Duty when considering whether to issue a claim for possession when the possibility of discrimination exists. Failure to take into account all relevant matters, and to promote the aims of the Equality Act, can lead to claims being successfully defended.
John Murray is a partner and head of the social housing group at Ward Hadaway. He can be contacted on 0330 137 3113 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
