Social Welfare Lawyers in the Centre of Birmingham

Housing News and Other News

Sophie, Dean and others, V Simon Mitchell and the Secretary of State for Levelling-Up, Housing and Communities [2023 ]EWHC1479 (KB)15 June 2023.

The first defendant (D1) began occupying a mobile home on land now owned by the claimants in about 2001. There was never any written agreement. There was a verbal licence and rent was paid. At the commencement of D1’s licence agreement the use of the claimants’ land for the stationing of a mobile home was not authorised by any planning permission.

High Court issues declaration of incompatibility with the Human Rights Act 1998

Dean vs Mitchell & Secretary of State for Levelling-up, Housing and Communities [2023] EWHC 1479 (KB)

Stephen Cottle of the Garden Court Housing Team represented the first defendant, instructed by Chris Johnson of Community Law Partnership.

The High Court rejected the Government’s argument that it was justified to deny security to those living in a mobile home on a protected site, and declared the Mobile Homes Act (MHA) 1983, as amended, to be incompatible with Article 8 of the ECHR, insofar as it required that result.

Article 6 in the Supreme Court – Jones v Birmingham City Council

This Appeal was heard by the Supreme Court on 30 and 31 January 2023. CLP represented Mr Jones and his barristers were Helen Mountfield QC and James Stark.

In 2016, HHJ McKenna granted an Interim Injunction preventing Mr Jones from entering a large part of central Birmingham save for exceptional circumstances on account of his alleged involvement in gang-related activities. 17 months later, HHJ Wall made a final injunction which lasted for two years, so Mr Jones was excluded from whole swathes of Birmingham and prevented from contacting a number of his friends for 3 years and 5 months. He appealed to the High Court on the basis that the Orders were incompatible with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights because, in spite of the draconian effects that the Orders had on his freedom, the allegations against him only had to be proved to the civil standard of proof (more likely than not) as opposed to the criminal standard of proof (that you are sure). Mr Jones appealed to the Court of Appeal and the Court of Appeal dismissed his Appeal. The Supreme Court gave him permission to Appeal. Following the Hearing before the Supreme Court, judgment is reserved and we will post the result here when we have it.

Challenging Birmingham’s Allocations Scheme

R(Nur & Abdulahi) v Birmingham City Council [2020]EWHC 3526 (Admin)

Mrs Nur lived with her three adult daughters in private rented accommodation. Her daughter, Zakiya suffers from cerebral palsy and has learning difficulties.