Tag Archive for 'human rights act'

x’=γ(x-vt)*

Without further ado, a hodge-podge of Equality and Human Rights updates.

Firstly, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Justice have finally launched the long expected Commission on a UK Bill of Rights. The Commission comprises a number of human rights and constitutional law experts and, er, some people who are presumably Cameron’s kind of people. The UK Human Rights Blog has a better analysis of the qualifications of the various members. The terms of reference, as expected, do not include the option of complete withdrawal from the Convention. What they do include is:

“The Commission will investigate the creation of a UK Bill of Rights … Read the full post

The bottled water of principle

There is an interesting interview with Baroness Hale of the Supreme Court on the UKSC blog, (also reposted on the Guardian Law site, which has been really rather good since launch).

Lady HaleIt is well worth a read, not only for Lady Hale fighting for the separation of the Supreme Court from Government by insisting on bottled water in the canteen in the face of MoJ policy, but for her views on the operation of the Supreme Court. There is much of interest on diversity on the bench and in the SC, and, for housing lawyers, particularly on the question of socio-economic ‘positive rights’, where she sees a mismatch … Read the full post

Homeless reviews and fact finding in the Supreme Court

We’ve been told that Ali & Ibrahim v Birmingham City Council (now Ali, Ibrahim and Tomlinson v BCC) was heard in the Supreme Court today, 23 November, and continues tomorrow. Our report on the Court of Appeal judgment ([2008] EWCA 1228) is here. The issue is whether Housing Act 1996 s.202 reviews are Article 6 compliant. Judgment now awaited – this should be significant, either way.… Read the full post

Yeah, of course I'll call

It’s a bit like one of those nights that just, you know, didn’t work out. You remember, it was all very slow, not really gratifying and, in the end, disappointingly inconclusive.

The Government has released its response [link to PDF] to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights report of 2007. Yes, 2007. The report that was released prior to the Lords judgment in YL v Birmingham City Council and the changed law in respect of care homes providing Local Authority contracted services in Health and Social Care Act 2008.

So, the Government notes the concerns that the Courts’ approach to what constitutes a public function for the purposes of … Read the full post

I think they're trying to tell us something

The European Court of Human Rights has just given judgment in Paulic v Croatia (App. No. 3572/06), a case on Article 8 and possession proceedings. Given the unbroken trend of authority from Connors to Zehentner, via McCann and Cosic (all noted in the excellent and Tarantino-themed post by Dave, here), it shouldn’t be too difficult to guess how this case went.

Mr Paulic was a civilian employee of the Yugoslav People’s Army (“YPA”) who, in 1991, was granted the right to occupy (and purchase) a flat owned by the YPA. In July 1991, the Croatian state prohibited all land transactions involving property which was owned by the YPA. … Read the full post

Not seriously arguable

Another case on post-Doherty public law defences was handed down on Friday. Stokes v London Borough of Brent [2009] EWHC 1426 (QB) concerned an appeal summary possession order made against a traveller in unlicenced occupation of a plot on a Brent traveller’s site.

Ms Stokes had lived at her mother’s plot on the site and had been on the waiting list. She moved onto a plot which contained a site office on part of it, but was not used as a caravan site, in about January 2007. In April 2007 Brent wrote to say that her trespass would not be tolerated. However, in October 2007, Brent wrote to say … Read the full post

RSL meet HRA, HRA meet RSL

Well, well, well.  Or perhaps well, well, oh heck.  The Court of Appeal has handed down its judgment in R (Weaver) v London & Quadrant Housing Trust [2009] EWCA Civ 587 and, by a majority, L&Q have lost.

It will be remembered that Mrs Weaver was a tenant of L&Q.  L&Q sought to evict her, relying on Ground 8.  She resisted this, claiming that she had a legitimate expectation that they would use Grounds 10 or 11 first and that the eviction engaged Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.  The High Court rejected any suggestion of a legitimate expectation.  Because of the way that it was advanced … Read the full post



row of sheds footer image
2 pages