header-logo header-logo

The dispossessed?

02 September 2011 / Jon Holbrook
Issue: 7479 / Categories: Opinion , Housing
printer mail-detail

Jon Holbrook assesses the ability of councils to bring possession proceedings against tenants involved in the recent riots

In the wake of the riots that swept through several cities in August, the Prime Minister stated that people who “loot and pillage their own community” should be evicted from council houses. A number of authorities, including Wandsworth, Westminster, Greenwich, Hammersmith and Fulham, Nottingham and Salford have either served eviction notices or said they will consider serving them in an attempt to evict those involved in the riots.

The desirability of the proposal has provoked much comment but this article considers the legal issues that are most likely to arise when possession proceedings are brought against council tenants who either rioted or who live with family members who did. Although concerned primarily with council tenancies, similar issues would arise for housing associations and private landlords as the legislation is materially the same under the Housing Acts 1985 and 1988.

Locality

Since it was introduced by the Housing Act 1996 (HA 1996), local authority landlords have been

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll