header-logo header-logo

25 November 2010 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7443 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Housing
printer mail-detail

Beating a path

Nicholas Dobson reflects on Pinnock, proportionality & possession

Where do county courts stand on proportionality when considering whether to make a housing possession order at the suit of a local authority? The issue has been beset by some labyrinthine complexity as domestic courts have struggled to align the requirements of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) with English law. However, the Supreme Court may have managed to beat a path through the tangled undergrowth in its 3 November 2010 decision in Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45.

The House of Lords had held in three relatively recent cases (Harrow London Borough Council v Qazi [2003] UKHL 43; Kay v Lambeth London Borough Council [2006] UKHL 10 and Doherty v Birmingham City Council [2008] UKHL 57) that it was not open to a residential occupier, against whom possession was being sought by a local authority, to raise a proportionality argument under Art 8. This was because the majority view was that personal interests safeguarded by Art 8 must be taken

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll