Two London boroughs were entitled to evict homeless applicants in temporary accommodation without a court order, the Supreme Court has held.
R (ZH & CN) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham and Sims v Dacorum Borough Council [2014] UKSC 62 concerned whether temporary accommodation provided under the Housing Act 1996, Part VII constitutes a building occupied under a licence and therefore provides protection from eviction and also whether the local authority must obtain an order before an eviction can be made.
The appellants, CN and ZH, and their families spent time living in temporary accommodation but, after a while, they were found ineligible for assistance by the local authority and asked to leave. They brought a judicial review.
In Sims, the appellant and his wife were secure tenants of a local authority property. The wife left and gave notice to quit, which terminated the tencancy. The local authority took possession but the husband brought a legal challenge. The court unanimously dismissed the husband’s appeal.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal 5-2, Lord Neuberger and Lady Hale dissenting.
Matt Hutchings, of Cornerstone Barristers, who acted as lead counsel for the local authorities, says: “As the dissenting judgments show, the legal arguments in these cases were not easy.
“Given the substantial resource implications and the serious pressures they are under, many local authorities will feel very relieved with the outcome.”
He said the dissenting judgments opined that “dwelling” carries its ordinary meaning and that “a temporary dwelling” is a natural use of language, which favoured a wide interpretation.
On Sims, Ranjit Bhose QC, of Cornerstone Barristers, who represented Dacorum, says: “It is important to note the emphasis placed by the judgment of the Supreme Court on the interests of the landlord and departing joint tenant, and not just the remaining tenant, in considering Art 1P rights.
“Further, the attempt by those representing Mr Sims to seek Art 8 engagement at the point of the service of a notice to quit was also roundly rejected. This is good news for local housing authorities and housing associations in particular as they seek to address the increasing pressures on their housing stock. We are aware of a number of cases being put on hold awaiting this judgment and which can now proceed.”
