Housing law news and comment
Very very busy and very tired, I currently come home and just stare blankly at the demanding voracious maw of the blog monster-child. Being too shattered to come up with anything to stuff down its greedy gullet, I can only feel guilt at its piteous cries of abandonment. It’s like Eraserhead, honest.
Which is one way to say that I may not be posting for a while, depending. But I will at some point soon-ish, hand on heart.… Read the full post
Sorry for another Times story reference, but I felt myself slipping into bewilderment with this story. Third party financing for bringing a case, OK. But it is then denied that there is any resemblance to encouraging personal litigation because:
Helping one company to sue another and possibly profiting from it is simply not the same thing as helping the victim of a car accident to sue the driver at fault. One is a personal dispute that may have involved tangible human suffering; the other involves a business managing commercial risk.
Eh? Colour me stupid but what, precisely, is the difference? “I fund you to bring a case and take … Read the full post
This has nothing to do with law, but sometimes a personal howl of frustration must be let loose.
The topic is crappy internet service providers. To be specific, Pipex Internet. I am a Pipex subscriber, although not for very much longer. I have been for years. It used to be a reliable and not overly expensive provider for a 1Mps ADSL connection.
Over the last year or so, things have gone badly wrong.
First was the upgrade fiasco. With the introduction of new subscriptions and the promise of ‘up to’ 8Mps connections, I was naturally interested in transferring – paying less for a faster connection. The online upgrade application page … Read the full post
In one of the least surprising outcomes of a CPS consideration of merits of prosecution since, oh let’s say the cash for honours flasco, ‘Klara and Edda bellydancing’ has been decided to be ‘not indecent‘.
So, a photo previously ‘investigated’ for indecency in 2001 and found not indecent then, that has repeatedly been published in the UK, and that was to be exhibited in a contemporary art gallery has required a 6 week investigation to be ‘cleared’. Stunning work.
Perhaps it took 6 weeks because the prosecutors had apparently to address the utterly metaphysical dilemma of whether ‘standards of propriety’ had changed since 2001. Is there no minimum … Read the full post
Just a quick note on the Admin Court decision in Gilboy, R (on the application of) v Liverpool City Council & Anor [2007] EWHC 2335 (Admin).
The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 modifies Housing Act 1985 and 1996 to allow a secure tenancy to be changed to a ‘demoted tenancy’ via an application by the Council to the Court for a ‘demotion order’, on the basis of anti-social behaviour. The demoted tenancy has lesser security and rights. In fact, in most ways, a demoted tenancy is functionally identical to an introductory tenancy.
The only difference is that where a local authority decides to move to possession proceedings against a demoted … Read the full post
Right then, Harouki v Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea [2007] EWCA Civ 1000.
The scene in a nutshell. A statutorily overcrowded household, in terms of Part 10 of the Housing Act 1985, s.326, which gives rise to a criminal offence under s.327
A homeless application under s.175 “entitled to occupy” and s.175(3) “reasonable to continue to occupy”. A negative s.184 decision, and review decision and s.204 appeal decision on the basis that it was reasonable for the appellant to continue to occupy the property.
The whole case turns on the Code of Guidance issued by the Secretary of State in respect of Part VII applications. This guidance states:… Read the full post
Latest Decisions Administrative Court from Bailii Latest Court of Appeal Civil Judgments from Bailii Latest Decisions Supreme Court from Bailii
Recent Comments