Selective Licensing Area

February 26th, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Housing

The appeal in Brown v Hyndburn Borough Council (2018) EWCA Civ 242 raised a question of general importance as to the extent of the powers conferred on local housing authorities under Part 3 of the Housing Act 2004 (respectively “Part 3” and “the 2004 Act”) to include as part of the licence required in the case of any house to which that Part applies conditions regulating the management, use or occupation of the house concerned. The issue is one of statutory interpretation of Section 90 of Part 3, and requires review of the statutory architecture and objectives of the 2004 Act, and, in particular, its Parts 1 and 2.

The context in which the question arose was that the Appellant is a private sector landlord acting in conjunction with 346 other property owners who are all members of the Hyndburn Landlord Association, the representative body for landlords in the Hyndburn area founded by the Appellant and other landlords. The Respondent, Hyndburn Borough Council, is the local housing authority for the district. Read more »

 

Homelessness

February 26th, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Housing

CLG has issued Guidance on 22 February 2018 on how local authorities should exercise their homelessness functions in accordance with the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 from 3 April 2018. Local housing and social services authorities must have regard to this guidance when exercising their functions relating to people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. This guidance will be in force from 3 April 2018 when the Homelessness Reduction Act comes into force.

Chapter 1 states the purpose of the Code and the relevant equality duties that housing authorities need to consider in carrying out their duties.  Chapter 2 gives guidance on housing authority duties to carry out a homelessness review and publish a homelessness strategy. Chapter 3 gives guidance on housing authority duties to provide free advice and information about homelessness and the prevention of homelessness, and to ensure they design advice to meet the needs of particular vulnerable groups. Chapter 4 gives guidance on the duty on specified public bodies to refer service users that may be homeless or threatened with homelessness to a local housing authority. Chapter 5 gives guidance on contracting out homelessness functions. Chapter 6 gives guidance on how to determine whether a person is homeless or threatened with homelessness according to legislation. Chapter 7 gives guidance on the provisions relating to an applicant’s eligibility for homelessness services. Chapter 8 gives guidance on the categories of applicant who have a priority need for accommodation if they become homeless. Chapter 9 gives guidance on determining whether an applicant has become homeless intentionally under homelessness legislation. Chapter 10 gives guidance on the provisions relating to an applicant’s local connection with an area and explains the procedures for referring an applicant to another housing authority. Chapter 11 gives guidance on the initial assessments required to determine the duties owed to a person applying for homelessness assistance; personalised housing plans and the reasonable steps to be taken to prevent or relieve homelessness. Chapter 12 gives guidance on duties owed to applicants who are threatened with becoming homeless, to try and prevent their homelessness. Chapter 13 gives guidance on duties owed to applicants who are homeless, to try and relieve their homelessness. Chapter 14 gives guidance on how the prevention and relief duties come to an end. Chapter 15 gives guidance on housing authority duties and powers to secure accommodation for applicants; how they arise and are brought to an end, including under the main housing duty. Chapter 16 gives guidance on the various ways in which housing authorities can secure suitable accommodation for applicants. Chapter 17 gives guidance on housing authority duties to ensure that accommodation secured for homeless applicants is suitable. Chapter 18 gives guidance on procedural requirements related to homelessness applications and the notification of decisions. Chapter 19 gives guidance on the procedures to be followed when an applicant requests a review of decisions reached on their homelessness application. Chapter 20 gives guidance on the duties and powers housing authorities have to protect the personal property of an applicant who is homeless. Chapter 21 gives guidance on providing homelessness services to people who have experienced or are at risk of domestic violence or abuse. Chapter 22 gives guidance on providing homelessness services to care leavers. Chapter 23 gives guidance on providing homelessness services to people with an offending history. Chapter 24 gives guidance on providing homelessness services to former members of the armed forces. Chapter 25 gives guidance on providing homelessness services to victims of modern slavery. Annex 1 gives guidance on considering housing applications from persons who are subject to the habitual residence test.

CLG has also published the Government response to the Consultation on the Code of Guidance.https://local-government-law.11kbw.com/wp-admin/admin.php?page=readygraph-app

 

Interpretation of Contract

February 26th, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Decision making and Contracts

Amey Birmingham Highways v Birmingham City Council (2018) EWCA Civ 264 concerned a local authority’s PFI highway maintenance contract. The contract was intended to run for 25 years.  It was a “relational contract”.  At paragraph 93, Jackson LJ, with whom Moylan LJ and Sir Stephen Tomlinson agreed, observed that: “Any relational contract of this character is likely to be of massive length, containing many infelicities and oddities.  Both parties should adopt a reasonable approach in accordance with what is obviously the long-term purpose of the contract.  They should not be latching onto the infelicities and oddities, in order to disrupt the project and maximise their own gain”.

 

Employment Contract

February 26th, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Decision making and Contracts

Case C-518/15, Ville de Nivelles v Matzak, in which the ECJ gave Judgment on 21 February 2018, concerned the employment contract between the Town of Nivelles in Belgium and Mr Matzak, a volunteer firefighter for the Town.  The issue related to stand-by times and remuneration.  During periods of stand-by duty, every member of the volunteer fire service serving in the Nivelles fire station must remain at all times within a distance of the fire station such that the period necessary to reach it when traffic is running normally does not exceed a maximum of 8 minutes, and be particularly vigilant so as to remain within range of various technical means used to call staff and to leave immediately, by the most appropriate means, when staff on stand-by duty are called.

This involved the concepts of “working time” and “rest periods” in the Working Time Directive. Read more »

 

Funding for respite service

February 23rd, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Social Care

In R (Juttla) v Hertfordshire Valleys Clinical Commissioning Group (2018) EWHC 267 (Admin) Mostyn J set aside the resolution made by the Defendant on 16 November 2017 to remove funding of £600,000 annually from Nascot Lawn in Watford (a respite service for children with complex medical needs) with effect from 16 May 2018. The consequence is that the Defendant must now comply with its legal duty formally to consult Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) about its proposal to withdraw that funding.

The Defendant maintained that it was not funding a “health service” within the terms of Sections 3 and 3A of the National Health Service Act 2006. The Judge ruled however that the services provided at Nascot Lawn are health services.  That being so, Regulation 23 of the Local Authority (Public Health, Health and Wellbeing Boards and Health Scrutiny) Regulations 2013 (SI 2013 No. 218), falls within Part 4 of the Statutory Instrument which is entitled “Health Scrutiny by Local Authorities”. That Part establishes a scheme whereby local authorities will be fully and formally consulted on any major health service changes in their area, will have the opportunity to scrutinise them, and in the absence of agreement will have the opportunity of seeking redress from the Secretary of State. Read more »

 

Air Quality

February 22nd, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Planning and Environmental

 In R (Client Earth) No. 3 v SoS for the Environment (2018) EWHC 315 (Admin) Garnham J held (paragraphs 80 and 104) that the DEFRA 2017 Air Quality Plan, in its application to 45 local authority areas, does not contain measures sufficient to ensure substantive compliance with Directive 2008/50/EC and the implementing 2010 English Regulations.

 

Succession to secure tenancy

February 21st, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Housing

In Haringey LBC v Simawi (2018) EWHC 290 (QB) the Council refused to allow the Defendant to succeed to a secure tenancy on the basis of the “no second succession rule”.  The Defendant contended that this rule, contained in Sections 87-88 of the Housing Act 1985 (“HA 1985”), is incompatible with Articles 8 and 14 of the ECHR. In summary, it was contended that the relevant sections of  HA 1985 treat differently a tenant whose partner dies and a tenant whose marriage/civil partnership with his/her partner had broken-down. In the former case, the tenant is treated as a successor under Sections 87-88 of HA 1985. In the latter case, if the tenancy was assigned under a property assignment order made in matrimonial proceedings, then the person remaining in residence would become a tenant de novo. In consequence, the Defendant contended that a child who would otherwise satisfy the succession requirements of HA 1985 is treated less favourably if his/her parent was a sole tenant because of death than as a result of relationship breakdown. Read more »

 

Planning Impacts

February 19th, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Planning and Environmental

Limiting carbon emissions in an effort to arrest global warming and climate change is a major policy objective of the government. EU law and national law, in the form of the Climate Change Act 2008, impose challenging national targets to reduce carbon emissions and seek to encourage a shift to utilising renewable sources of energy. That policy objective is also carried into Section 10 of the NPPF, headed “Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change”.

On 18 June 2015 a written ministerial statement (“the Statement”) was made by the SoS for CLG. It set out new considerations touching applications for planning permission for wind turbines.  The Statement included that in specified circumstances LPAs can find for a proposal, if following consultation, they are satisfied it has “addressed” the planning impacts identified by affected local communities and therefore has their backing.  The Statement is a “material consideration” for the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.  It is capable of outweighing policy in the development plan for the area. Read more »

 

Adequacy of damages

February 16th, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Decision making and Contracts

In the public procurement case of Word Perfect Translation Services Ltd v Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform 2018/20, the Irish Court of Appeal declined to lift an automatic suspension, holding that (1) the claimant could obtain only Francovich damages, (2) damages were therefore not an adequate remedy for the claimant, and (3) the fact that damages are not an adequate remedy may well be decisive in terms of evaluation of where the greatest risk of possible injustice and the balance of convenience lies.

 

ECHR Article 1/1

February 15th, 2018 by James Goudie KC in Human Rights and Public Sector Equality Duty

In R (Mott) v Environment Agency (2018) UKSC 10 the Supreme Court ruled that in the case of “control” short of “expropriation” consideration must be given to whether the effects are “excessive and disproportionate” (para 32), drawing a “fair balance” between public and private interests (para 33), and that compensation is potentially relevant (paras 33-35). Nonetheless (para 37), (1) the national authorities have a “wide margin of discretion” in the imposition of necessary environmental controls, (2) A1/P1 of the ECHR gives “no general expectation of compensation for environmental effects”, and (3) where an authority has given proper consideration to the issue of “fair balance”, the Courts should give weight to their assessment.