header-logo header-logo

Pinnock reigns supreme

11 November 2010
Issue: 7441 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Landmark ruling increases protection for social housing tenants

Courts must consider proportionality when hearing possession cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark ruling that will give social housing tenants greater protection.

The justices unanimously held, in Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45 that, where a person’s home is at stake, that person should be able to have the proportionality as well as the reasonableness of that decided by a court, under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The tenant, Cleveland Pinnock, had his secure tenancy with Manchester City Council demoted due to the anti-social and sometimes criminal behaviour of his adult children, who would sometimes visit him. A year later, just before his tenancy was due to revert to a secure tenancy, he was served with an eviction order. He challenged the decision.

While Pinnock’s eviction notice was upheld in this case, the decision sets an important precedent for social housing law.

Andrew Lane, barrister at Hardwicke chambers, said the decision was “a major shift from previous House of Lords’ decisions and current practice”.

“Mr Pinnock appealed on the basis that he had not been allowed by domestic law to raise the issue of the proportionality of his eviction for reasons related to the behaviour of his adult sons rather than his own behaviour, even though Art 8 European Convention on Human Rights and the case law of the European Court required him to be able to raise this issue. He had been a tenant for more than 30 years, and no allegations have ever been made against him personally. 

“Although reasonableness is currently able to be raised, the effect of this judgment is that judges and lawyers now need to grapple with the difference between reasonableness and proportionality. It also encourages more defences to mandatory claims for possession.”

John Wadham, group director legal at the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which intervened in the case, said the judgment “does not prevent social landlords from evicting a tenant...what it does mean is that such decisions will not be taken lightly”.
 

Issue: 7441 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Is a suspect’s state of mind a ‘fact’ capable of triggering adverse inferences? Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Smith of Corker Binning examines how R v Leslie reshapes the debate
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
back-to-top-scroll