As is now pretty well known (and as I noted in the comments below this post) Wandsworth Council apparently made a bid to bring the first riot related possession proceedings. There are some things about Wandsworth’s behaviour that should be pointed out, but it also turns out that all might not be as it seems, leaving some questions for Wandsworth to answer.
Sadly, I’m going to have to link to some sources (including the Daily Mail) that identify the Wandsworth tenant and her son, who is the alleged rioter. I’m not going to use their names because, at least at present, I see no reason to do and quite … Read the full post
Barking & Dagenham LBC v Bakare, Imevbore & Imevbore. Romford County Court 14/03/2011 HHJ Platt [unreported elsewhere]
A county court case, but one with some interesting issues. Also a cautionary tale on being able to actually provide evidence of allegations and raising matters in the right proceedings.
Barking had applied within existing possession proceedings for a final order for possession of a property under Grounds 1 and 2 of Schedule 2 of the Housing Act 1985 against Ms Bakare. Barking also claimed against the second and third defendants (who are the adult sons of the first defendant) for anti social behaviour orders under section 1 of the Crime and … Read the full post
In More Effective Respopnses to Anti-Social Behaviour the Government sets out its plans for reforms of the ASBO and other associated remedies. In brief, the government thinks that:
(a) there are too many tools for dealing with ASB and practitioners tend to stick with the ones they know best;
(b) some tools (especially the ASBO) are slow, bureaucratic and expensive;
(c) ASBOs are not deterring ASB;
(d) tools designed to deal with underlying causes of ASB are rarely used.
Therefore, the government proposes to abolish some 17 remedies (ASBO, CRASBO, Interim ASBO, ASB injunction, individual support order, intervention order, crack house closure order, premises closure order, brothel closure order, designated … Read the full post
Birmingham City Council v Persons Unknown – 0BM70352 (noted by way of Arden Chambers Eflash) is a successful attempt by a local authority to distinguish the decision in Birmingham CC v Shafi  EWCA Civ 1186;  1 WLR 1961;  HLR 25 (our note here) and successfully obtain an injunction under s.222, Local Government Act 1972.
As readers no-doubt remember, Shafi had held that, where an authority sought to restrain anti-social behaviour by way of injunction under s.222, 1972 Act, the court should, save in exceptional circumstances, decline to grant such an injunction if it was satisfied that an ASBO would also be available. In essence, if an … Read the full post
James v Birmingham City Council  EWHC 282 (Admin) is a further dispute about the power of the court to vary an ASBO.
A magistrates court may make and ASBO against any person over the age of 10 if it can be proved (to the criminal standard of proof, using the civil rules of evidence) that he has acted in an anti-social manner, that is to say, in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself and that it is necessary for such an order to be made – s.1(1), Crime and Disorder … Read the full post
Not a post about Christmas shopping, (which is all done, thanks to Amazon) but about delays in lodging appeals against ASBOs and the case of R (Birmingham CC) v Birmingham Crown Court; R (South Gloucestershire DC) v Bristol Crown Court  EWHC 3329 (Admin).
When a Magistrates’ court makes a stand alone ASBO (s.1(1), Crime and Disorder Act 1998), appeal (by way of re-hearing) is to the Crown Court. Neither the CPR nor the Criminal Procedure Rules govern such applications, rather, they are dealt with by the Crown Court Rules 1982. Those rules require that notice of any appeal be lodged with the Crown Court within 21 days of … Read the full post