"We cannot part with this case without paying tribute to the claimants\' legal advisers who although greatly outnumbered by the Secretary of State\'s legal team have persisted with their requests for disclosure skilfully and with commendable determination." (per Lord Justice Scott-Baker in  R (on the application of Al-Sweady and Others) v The Secretary of State for Defence [2009] EWHC 2387 (Admin)).
Lord Justice Scott-Baker
 
 

Birmingham City Housing Chief wants to evict looters from council houses: but can he?

Birmingham City Housing Chief, Conservative Councillor John Lines, last week issued a clear threat to rioters living in Birmingham council houses.  The Birmingham Mail quoting him as saying: “There will be no soft option from me, I have thousands of decent law-abiding families queuing up for council houses and will waste no time getting rid of these scum of the earth.” 

 

Of course, by “getting rid” he means eviction.  Where a council tenant has been convicted of rioting on the streets, would evicting him or her so that they are now forced on to the streets lift our community?  Or would it entrench and worsen a huge problem? The perceived justice of eviction may be possible to understand but quite how it would benefit the Birmingham community is more difficult to see.

 

Putting these practical and ethical issues to one side, does he have the legal power to evict?  This is not a question to which Councillor John Lines pretends to have the answer.  He says that he will be taking legal advice on whether those convicted of disorder can be evicted under anti-social behaviour clauses in their tenancy agreements.  What will his legal advisors be telling him?

 

The answer may depend to a large extent on the terms of the Council’s tenancy agreements.  It would be surprising, however, if any clauses relating to anti-social behaviour were not concerned with the effect of such behaviour on residents of neighbouring property rather than an isolated incident (or small number of incidents) of anti-social behaviour that may have occurred several miles from the property.  The clauses would not have been drafted with the riots in mind and it is unlikely that the Council will be able to evict rioters on the basis of current tenancy agreements.

 

The Council does have some powers introduced by the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003.  Those powers enable the local housing authority to apply to the court for a “demotion order” which terminates a secure tenancy.  Such an order will only be made by the court where certain types of anti-social behaviour have been committed and the court considers it reasonable to make the order.  Alternatively, proceedings for possession may be brought under the Housing Act 1985 where a tenant has “been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to a person residing, visiting or otherwise engaging in a lawful activity in the locality.” It is unlikely that this will apply to rioting which will rarely have occurred within the locality of the residence.

 

Councillor John Lines may wish to evict looters but there is law, and a judicial process, that must be followed.  It is not likely that he will find a sound legal basis for the action he would like to take.


Other stories

Click on a story to read

  BBC: Baha Mousa book and Marie Colvin honoured by Orwell Prize ...
  HIGH COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO PROCEED WITH JUDICIAL REVIEW IN AFGHAN KILLINGS CASE...
  Guardian: British soldier under investigation for murder over shooting of young Afghans...
  Guardian: Labour abstention on workfare bill prompts party infighting...
  The Independent: First Al-Sweady witnesses to appear...
  DWP seeks law change to avoid benefit repayments after Poundland ruling...
  Judicial Review launched against Birmingham City Council over cuts to "Shelforce" - a supported disa...
  The Times: Lawyer of the week – Tessa Gregory...
  BBC: Al-Sweady inquiry opens in UK into deaths of Iraqis...
  Birmingham City Council threatened with Judicial Review proceedings over cuts to 'Shelforce' - a sup...
  Open Democracy: Home Secretary, please call off the attack on kidney patient Roseline Akhalu ...
  Court of Appeal Rules that the Government’s “Back to Work” Regulations are Unlawful and Must Be Quas...
  Verdict on Government’s “Back to Work” schemes will be handed down tomorrow, Tuesday 12 February 201...
  Verdict on Government’s “Back to Work” schemes will be handed down on Tuesday 12 February 2013 at 10...
  BBC: New Iraq abuse cases by British forces go to High Court...
  Public Interest Lawyers respond to false reports in the Sun Newspaper regarding cases relating to Af...
  Legal Challenge to Doncaster Mayor's Decision to Reduce Library Funding wins Permission to Appeal...
  Observer: Is Britain guilty of systemic torture in Iraq?...
  Ali Zaki Mousa (no.2) and Others v Secretary of State for Defence...
  Legal Challenge to Cuts to North Somerset Youth Services Wins Permission to Appeal...
  New Statesman: The trials of Roseline Akhalu...
  Maya Evans case: secret courts, torture and avoiding embarrassment...