Possession Proceedings and HRA/Public Law Defences
You Save: 50.00%exc VAT
( Hardwicke )
Course level: Intermediate
Date of recording: 16th August 2011
In this webinar, housing barristers Andy Lane and Arthur Moore look at the effect that the Human Rights Act has had on the ability of social landlords to take possession of their stock from tenants and the defences they are likely to encounter when they try to do so.
This webinar is formed of two parts. Part one, presented by Andy Lane, briefly examines the background to the Human Rights Act, looks at the way that it has been applied in the defence of housing possession claims and outlines which aspects of the Human Rights a
It will consider who is defined as a 'public authority' in the light of London & Quadrant Housing Trust v Weaver and examine the case law surrounding the use of Article 8 'Gateway A' defences to possession claims. Part one of the webinar will also consider the importance of social landlords following their own policies when it comes to enforcing possession claims.
The second part of the webinar, presented by Arthur Moore, will look at 'Gateway B' defences and the issues of proportionality raised by the recent Supreme Court cases of Manchester City Council v Pinnock and Hounslow LBC v. Powell and their practical implications for future possession claims by social landlords.
Having completed this course, it is expected that the viewer will have gained an understanding of:
- The development and use of 'Gateway A' defences to possession hearings under section 8 of the Human Rights Act
- The circumstances in which a social landlord will be considered a 'public authority' for the purposes of the Human Rights Act
- The difference between 'absolute', 'limited' and 'qualified' rights under the European Convention of Human Rights and how this relates to possession claims
- The necessity for social landlords to set out and follow clear anti-social behaviour policies and procedures to ensure that possession claims cannot be challenged in court
- The development and use of 'Gateway B' defences
- The meaning and importance of 'proportionality' in possession claims following the Supreme Court ruling in Pinnock.
- Overview: Human Rights Act 1998
Who does the Act apply to?
Are you a public authority?
- The European Convention on Human Rights
What are the Convention Rights?
Examples of Convention Rights
- Type of Convention Rights
- Article 8(1) - Right to respect for private and family life
- The inherent restrictions of Article 8
- When interference with qualified rights is permissible
- Legitimate Aims
- Kay-v-Lambeth LBC  UKHL 10 – the Gateway A defence
- Poplar HARCA-v-Donoghue (2002) QB 48: attack on s.21 Housing Act 1988 “system”
- Gateway A: Other Decisions Upholding Procedures used
- Why an anti-social behaviour policy is important
Barber-v-Croydon LBC  EWCA Civ 51
Salford City Council-v-Mullen  EWCA Civ 336
- The rise and rise of proportionality after Manchester CC v. Pinnock  UKSC 45
- What all the fuss is about: Article 8
- The way we were pre- Kay v. Lambeth  2 AC 456
- The way we were post- Kay v. Lambeth  2 AC 456
- The Gateway B defence
- Kay considered and “explained"
- The way we are: Manchester CC v. Pinnock  UKSC 45
What is a “Legitimate aim”?
The definition of “Proportionate”
What is clear
What is unclear
- Are things now any clearer after Hounslow LBC v. Powell  UKSC 8?
- The effect of Pinnock and Powell on social landlord
- Practical considerations
Watch a preview
Preview video is displayed smaller than actual size.
ABOUT THE PRESENTERS
Prior to coming to the Bar in 1999 Andy was working in the voluntary and statutory sectors in the area of debt, benefits and housing advice. He was also a local authority councillor for four years in the 1990s and for part of this period was chair of the Housing Committee.
At the Bar, Andy has quickly established himself in the social housing field in particular, being ranked consistently in Chambers UK as one of the leading juniors in this field. He has significant experience in the areas of homelessness (including county court appeals and judicial review claims), Part VI allocations, nuisance actions (possession and injunction work, as well as ASBOs), disrepair claims, unlawful eviction complaints and landlord and tenant work generally.
He has also worked in the wider property area, including trusts of land and inheritance claims, as well as in the community care and social security benefits fields.
Andy therefore advises and represents clients (including through direct access) in both the public and private sectors, landlords and tenants, local authorities and homeless applicants. He also has significant training and seminar experience both prior to coming to the Bar and since being called, including for CLT and the Chartered Institute of Housing.
Successfully defending a housing trust against a claim brought under the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 following the claimant's eviction and eventual disposal of all his belongings
Arthur came to the bar after studying physics at Oxford University, and taking the Diploma in Law at City University in London. After practising for five years at the Criminal bar he has, since 1997, specialised in disputes over land.
In the wider property law area, Arthur regularly advises and appears in cases of residential and commercial landlord and tenant such as leasehold disputes of all types in the LVT, and commercial lease renewal, as well as in broader property related disputes such as boundary determination, rights of way and trusts of land.
Arthur has a strong following amongst the leading solicitors who act for landlords and those that act for tenants. His practice includes claims relating to anti-social behaviour, disrepair, right to buy, succession, environmental protection and possession (with a speciality in relation to public law defences). He regularly advises social housing providers on broader policy issues surrounding the management of housing stock.
• Advising and appearing for tenant in non-statutory succession case
Tel: 020 7242 2523 (switchboard)