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
Thanks to Chief and with particular thanks to the UK Human Rights blog, we now know that the claimants in X&Y v Hounslow have gone to the European Court of Human Rights.
As you will recall, this was the desperately sad case which, at first instance, looked to establish a duty of care for local authorities to their tenants in certain circumstances. It was overturned at the Court of Appeal (our report) and then permission was refused to go to the House of Lords.
The ECtHR statement of facts and questions to the parties is here. It appears that the claimants are arguing breach of Art … Read the full post
Heffernan v LB Hackney EWCA Civ 655 is a timely reminder of the importance of having evidence to substantiate a claim for damages.
Mr Heffernan was the freehold owner of 16 Penhurst Road, London, E9 (“the property”). The property was converted into two flats, the upper flat being let on a tenancy protected under the Rent Act 1977 and the lower flat being vacant. Mr Heffernan was in dispute with the tenant of the upper flat and, as a result, had not been receiving payments of rent from the tenant, with the alleged result that various repairs were falling due.
There are several cases in the latest LAG updates that we haven’t covered and that are interesting. Thanks as ever to Jan Luba QC and HHJ Nic Madge for the LAG reports. There are two brief notes on County Court cases and a more sizeable one on Dobson v Thames Water, a Court of Appeal case on nuisance and Art 8 infringement that we had somehow missed from January and which isn’t discussed at length in LAG.
Southwark LBC v Jackson and Jackson, Lambeth County Court 27 January 2009 Mr & Mrs Jackson were elderly joint secure tenants. Mr Jackson had died, leaving Mrs Jackson as sole tenant. … Read the full post
When news of X first reached the NL team, the near unanimous response was one of pleasure at the result. Once we obtained a transcript and saw the reasoning of the trial judge, it became clear not only that an appeal would be pursued but that it would be successful. Those feelings were only strengthened by the decision of the House of Lords in Glasgow CC v Mitchell. And we’re been proved right.
The facts of X are truly awful. X and Y are, on any view, vulnerable adults. They both have learning difficulties and have low IQs. In these proceedings, … Read the full post
The House of Lords will be giving judgment in Glasgow CC v Mitchell on Wednesday 18 Feb 09 (link is to a .pdf). This is a case that we’ve missed so far but, in essence, is about the scope of the duty of care (if any) owed by a landlord to their tenants in respect of liability for the anti-social acts of another tenant. In outline, it is said that Mr Mitchell complained to Glasgow CC about his neighbour. He told Glasgow not to let his neighbour know about the complaint. Glasgow then interviewed the neighbour and told him about the complaint, naming Mr Mitchell. The neighbour then killed Mr … Read the full post
Specifically, the negligent failure found was that housing did not invoke emergency transfer processes, despite a) social services involvement with the family and b) complaints and warnings from neighbours about the youths’ presence and activities in the claimant’s home. It arose from a found lack of communication between social services and housing and lack of appreciation of the seriousness of the situation and failure to give priority in both departments, despite the evidence.