header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 October 2019 / Susan Bright , Douglas Maxwell
Issue: 7858 / Categories: Features , Housing , Human rights , Community care , Property , Criminal , Health & safety
printer mail-detail

Housing after Grenfell

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
8793
Can positive human rights make buildings safe after Grenfell? By Professor Susan Bright & Dr Douglas Maxwell
  • More than two years after the Grenfell tragedy, the scale of the fire safety problems in buildings remains unknown and hundreds of buildings still need remediation.
  • Flat owners are often left in legal limbo and human rights may provide one way for them to compel action is taken.

The second anniversary of the Grenfell Tower fire has come and gone, but the first report from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, chaired by Sir Martin Moore-Bick, has been delayed until later this month. The catastrophic loss of life at Grenfell has led to a new focus on building safety. In the immediate aftermath, public and political attention quickly turned to the tower’s refurbishment programme and the external cladding that had been installed, which appeared to explain the rapid spread of the fire. In turn, this led to a programme of testing, which has since identified as many as 200,000 people

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll