Monthly Archive for February, 2008

The hopeful LiP

By NL on 29/02/2008. 0 Comments

Although the energy to do proper case comments has deserted me until tomorrow, I couldn’t resist this exchange, which is just about all that is reported of Bedi, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Hounslow [2007] EWHC 3311 (Admin)

MR JUSTICE COLLINS: Now, Mr Bedi, as we have discussed, and for the reasons I have indicated, I am afraid I am going to have to refuse permission. As I say, you at least have the advantage that it has not cost you anything, at least not cost you anything so far as court fees and other side’s fees are concerned, and leave it to you to decide

… Read the full post

Posted in Various (non-housing). Tags: law, Litigant-in-person, whatever.

Suddenly…

By NL on 29/02/2008. 0 Comments

there are quite a few cases to cover.

Ahmad, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Newham [2008] EWCA Civ 140 on determining priority in allocation schemes.

G, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Southwark [2007] EWCA Civ 1506 on accommodation under s.20 Children Act 1989.

London Borough of Lambeth v Debrah [2007] EWCA Civ 1503 on refusal to stay or suspend an ASB possession order.

I also want to do a note on a case reported in the Gazette, but not on Bailii yet, Mansfield DC v Langridge (2008) CA (Civ Div).

But it has been a very intense week and my brain … Read the full post

Posted in Allocation, ASB, Community care, Housing law - All, Possession and secure-tenancy. Tags: anti-social behaviour, ASB, Children Act, homelessness, Housing law - All, law, Possession, s.20, secure-tenancy.

Considering Equality of Opportunity

By NL on 28/02/2008. 0 Comments

Baker & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government& Ors [2008] EWCA Civ 141. A Court of Appeal judgment on appeals of refusal for planning permission for the retention of mobile homes on green belt land by Irish traveller families. The appeal failed, but what is particularly interesting is the examination of section 71(1)(b) of the Race Relations Act 1976. The EHRC intervened in this appeal, so the issue of ‘due regard’ to s71 “the need to promote equality of opportunity between persons of different racial groups”, in public authority decision-making got a good hearing.

In the only judgment, Lord Justice … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Homeless, Housing law - All, Licences and occupiers and Regulation and planning. Tags: equal opportunity, Housing law - All, law, planning, travellers.

Holmes to the Lords

By NL on 24/02/2008. 0 Comments

Thanks to Mark P for noticing that Holmes-Moorhouse v LB Richmond is going to the House of Lords. Richmond sought and have been granted permission. I think this could be a tricky one, not just on the residence/staying with issue, but also on the differences between residence orders by consent rather than contested orders. No hearing date set yet.… Read the full post

Posted in Homeless and Housing law - All. Tags: homelessness, Housing law - All, law, shared residence.

The Crown as squatter

By NL on 20/02/2008. 0 Comments

A more than a little unusual Court of Appeal judgment on adverse possession has just been handed down. Roberts v Crown Estate Commissioners [2008] EWCA Civ 98. I won’t go into the details – it involved a challenge to Crown possession of an area of foreshore and river bed of the Severn by the purchaser of an ancient manorial title. The result – the Crown can gain property by adverse possession. ‘The same law of limitation applies to both Crown and citizen’.… Read the full post

Posted in Adverse possession, FLW case note and Housing law - All. Tags: Adverse possession, Housing law - All, law.

Time limitation on disability discrimination defence?

By NL on 19/02/2008. 0 Comments

This is definitely a specialist question, for which I seek housing people’s opinions.

A semi-hypothetical situation:

A suspended possession order made against the client, a secure tenant, two years ago on grounds of rent arrears. Client didn’t attend hearing. Client had contact with mental health services at the time, but it is now clear, on expert’s report, that the client has for some time, including the relevant period, suffered from serious mental health problems and that these are, at the least, related to the the accrual of rent arrears (benefit problems).

Post Malcolm, or even post Romano, there is a prima facie case for an application to set … Read the full post