||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 185 (Oct)
|| EWHC 2335 (Admin)
||Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
Stanley Burnton J
||Adam Fullwood (instructed by Jackson and Canter, Liverpool) for the claimant.
||Paul Burns (instructed by Michael Kenworthy) for the authority.
||Daniel Stilitz (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the interested party.
||15 October 2007
Housing - Local authority houses - Possession - Demoted tenancy - Whether mechanism for recovering possession of property let under demoted tenancy compatible with human rights - Introductory Tenants (Review) Regulations 1997, SI 1997/72 - , Sch 1, Pt 1, art 6 - Demoted Tenancies (Review of Decisions) (England) Regulations 2004, SI 2004/1679.
Housing Local authority houses. The Demoted Tenancies (Review of Decisions) (England) Regulations 2004, SI2004-1679, (concerning demoted tenancies, and which were subject to the provisions of the and 1996, as amended by the ), were not incompatible with art6 of the European Convention on Human Rights insofar as a review of a decision by an officer of a local authority, in relation to the determination of a demoted tenancy, was carried out by an independent and impartial tribunal, even though the reviewing officer might have been from the same authority. Article 6 of the Convention only applied to a determination of civil rights and obligations; a reviewing officer's decision did not determine any right or obligation, on the contrary, rights were conferred and obligations were imposed upon tenants. Under the scheme, the local authority had a right to apply to a county court for an order for possession, the determination of the demoted tenancy's rights would then be made by a decision of the county court, and unless and until the county court made an order for possession, the tenant's tenancy continued unaffected by the reviewing officer's decision. If however, following a decision to seek possession, the local authority failed to bring proceedings for possession within six months of the service of the notice of proceedings for possession, the demoted tenancy would revert to a secure tenancy. Further, art6 of the Convention was concerned with procedure, and could not be used to confer substantive rights, such as a right not to be evicted unless further anti-social behaviour was proved, which Parliament had not conferred. Lastly, having regard to the authorities, it could not be said that the Regulations were materially distinguishable from other like Regulations, for example, a scheme which related to an internal local authority review of a decision to seek possession of a property held under an introductory tenancy, pursuant to the Introductory Tenants (Review) Regulations 1997, .
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary