Tag Archive for 'human-rights'

Occupy LSX update

As you may well have seen in the news, the Corporation of London was granted a possession order and injunction against the tents and camp of Occupy LSX in the churchyard area outside St Paul’s Cathedral by the High Court on Wednesday 18 January. The judgment is on the Judiciary website here.

We’ll have a note on the judgment shortly, but the main finding was that, given the Corporation’s right to possession, the interference with the protestors’ Article 10 and 11 rights was justified and proportionate in view of the need to protect the rights and freedoms of others, including public passers-by, St Paul’s Cathedral, church-goers and businesses in … Read the full post

Money can’t buy you everything

Sun Street Properties Ltd v Persons Unknown [2011] EWHC (Ch), [2011] All ER (D) 72 (Dec) [no transcript available yet]

Or, what the hell is going on about Occupy/Bank of Ideas and the property owned by Union Bank of Switzerland. As you probably noticed, on 18 November 2011, an empty property in the City was occupied by a group connected with the OccupyLSX camp outside St Paul’s. The property was ultimately owned by the UBS, the ones who allegedly just lost some $2.3 billion through a rogue trader.

At the time, I predicted that UBS (or rather their subsidiary, Sun Street Properties Ltd) would go for an interim possession order … Read the full post

Morris dancing

Bah v The United Kingdom – 56328/07 [2011] ECHR 1448

This is a decision of the European Court of Human Rights on the regulations for eligibility for housing support, after the declaration of incompatibility in Westminster v Morris [2005] EWCA Civ 1184.

It is a very significant case, not least because it has a direct bearing on the ‘corrective’ amendment that the Government made 4 years later in response to Morris via Schedule 15 Housing and Regeneration Act 2008 and the possibilities of any challenge to that Schedule. It also has broader implications for differential conditions for access to social welfare benefits in general, where a child subject to immigration … Read the full post

That’s not the way to do it

Zolotareva v Russia (App. No. 15003/04)

With a hat-tip to the Garden Court bulletin, here is a decision of the European Court of Human Rights on the enforcement of an eviction. Ms Zolotareva lived in a municipally owned flat with her son, ex-daughter-in-law and grandchild. She thought that could no longer all live together (I refer you to the “ex” in the last sentence and possibly also the “in-law”) and commenced proceedings for the eviction of her son’s ex-wife. She in turn counter-claimed, asking the court to order that they all get rehoused elsewhere.

The court sided with the ex-wife and ordered not only that she and her … Read the full post

X & Y v UK settled without hearing

X, Y & Z v the United Kingdom – 32666/10 [2011] ECHR 1199

The long and sorry story of X & Y v Hounslow appears to have reached an end. As you will recall, this was the case that resulted from the horrendous abuse of two highly vulnerable Hounslow tenants in their home by youths. Hounslow had been aware of the danger to X & Y in the period leading up to the abuse but had failed to make any provision to transfer them to alternative, safer, accommodation. At first instance, the High Court found for X & Y on a claim based on negligence (our report), then … Read the full post

Croatia, proportionality and history

Orlic v Croatia [2011] ECHR 974 (Application no. 48833/07) [Link to rtf file]

This is a European Court of Human Rights First Section decision on an article 8 case. Although not of immediate application, it is a useful restatement of the principle that where an occupier faces loss of their home by action by a public body, it must be possible for the proportionality of the eviction to be considered by an independent tribunal.

Mr Orlic had been allocated a flat by the Yugoslav Peoples Army in Croatia in 1991, about a month before  Croatia declared independence but 4 months after the Republic of Croatia had passed a law banning … Read the full post

Not too late but too little

Southwark LBC  v Barrett Bromley County Court 18/03/2011

A County Court Pinnock case. Unsuccessful but interesting in that it was a transitional case, commenced before the Pinnock judgment, and to the extent that it shows the court using the ‘seriously arguable’ threshold.

Ms Barrett was a non secure tenant, the tenancy being granted under Part VII Housing Act 1996. The landlord served notice to quit after Southwark discharged duty, following Ms B’s refusal of alternative accommodation.

Ms B was advised by a solicitor that there was no defence (this was pre Pinnock) and she did  not attend the hearing. About 4 weeks later, after Pinnock, she applied to set aside … Read the full post



row of sheds footer image
13 pages