Before : LORD JUSTICE GROSS LORD JUSTICE LEWISON and LORD JUSTICE FLAUX Between :
|
|
- Rachel Greene
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWCA Civ 1476 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE STAINES COUNTY COURT District Judge Trigg 3BO03394 Before : Case No: B5/2016/4135 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 5 th October 2017 LORD JUSTICE GROSS LORD JUSTICE LEWISON and LORD JUSTICE FLAUX Between : MR AARON HARRIS - and - THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF HOUNSLOW Appellant Respondent MR ANTHONY KATZ (instructed by Ash Solicitors for the Appellant MS TINA CONLAN (instructed by HB Public Law) for the Respondent Hearing date: 26 September Judgment
2 Lord Justice Lewison: 1. On 13 October 2016, on the application of the London Borough of Hounslow, DJ Trigg made a possession order against one of its secure tenants, Mr Aaron Harris. She did so on a new mandatory ground for possession inserted into the Housing Act 1985 ( the 1985 Act ) by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 ( the 2014 Act ). The question on this appeal is whether Hounslow s actions can be successfully challenged on public law grounds. 2. The 2014 Act introduced a large number of remedies for anti-social behaviour. The overall purpose of the legislation was to put victims first. Two closely allied remedies were a closure order which can be made by a magistrates court, and a new mandatory ground for possession of premises let under a secure tenancy in a case where a closure order has been made. Both these remedies were designed to be speedy. 3. The preliminary to the making of a closure order is the service of a closure notice. This is a notice served where a police inspector or a local authority is satisfied on reasonable grounds that that there has been, or (if the notice is not issued) is likely soon to be, disorder near particular premises associated with the use of those premises and that the notice is necessary to prevent the nuisance from continuing. The closure notice may prohibit access to the premises by anyone except those who habitually live there. The service of a closure notice is followed by an application to the magistrates for the making of a closure order. An indication of the need for speed is the statutory requirement in section 80 (3) of the 2014 Act that the magistrates must hear the application not later than 48 hours after the service of the closure notice. The magistrates may make a closure order if satisfied that a person has engaged, or (if the order is not made) is likely to engage, in disorderly, offensive or criminal behaviour on the premises, and that the order is necessary to prevent the behaviour, nuisance or disorder from continuing, recurring or occurring: section 80 (5). The effect of a closure order prohibits access to the premises for up to three months, and (unlike a closure notice) it may prohibit access even by persons who habitually live there. There is a right of appeal to the Crown Court against the making of a closure order. Any appeal must be made within 21 days of the decision: section 84 (5). 4. In tandem with the introduction of a closure order, the 1985 Act was amended to introduce a new mandatory ground for possession. As section 2.8 of statutory guidance issued by the Home Office explains, it applies where criminality or antisocial behaviour has already been proven by another court. The same guidance explained that: The purpose of the new absolute ground for possession is to speed up the possession process in cases where anti-social behaviour or criminality has been already been proven by another court. As the landlord will no longer need to prove that it is reasonable to grant possession, the court will be more likely to determine cases in a single, short hearing. This will strike a better balance between the rights of victims and perpetrators, and provide swifter relief for victims, witnesses and the community. The new absolute ground is intended for the most serious cases of antisocial behaviour and landlords should ensure that the ground is used selectively.
3 5. Before applying to court the landlord must serve notice on the tenant under section 83ZA of the 1985 Act. This provides, so far as relevant: (1) This section applies in relation to proceedings for possession of a dwelling-house under section 84A (absolute ground for possession for anti-social behaviour) (2) The court must not entertain the proceedings unless the landlord has served on the tenant a notice under this section. (3) The notice must (a) state that the court will be asked to make an order under section 84A for the possession of the dwelling-house, (b) set out the reasons for the landlord's decision to apply for the order (including the condition or conditions in section 84A on which the landlord proposes to rely), and (c) inform the tenant of any right that the tenant may have under section 85ZA to request a review of the landlord's decision and of the time within which the request must be made. (7) A notice which states that the landlord proposes to rely upon condition 4 in section 84A (a) (b) must also state the closure order concerned, and must be served on the tenant within (i) the period of 3 months beginning with the day on which the closure order was made, or (ii) if there is an appeal against the making of the order, the period of 3 months beginning with the day on which the appeal is finally determined, abandoned or withdrawn. (8) A notice under this section must also inform the tenant that, if the tenant needs help or advice about the notice and what to do about it, the tenant should take it immediately to a Citizens' Advice Bureau, a housing aid centre, a law centre or a solicitor. (9) The notice (a) must also specify the date after which proceedings for the possession of the dwelling-house may be begun, and
4 (b) ceases to be in force 12 months after the date so specified. (10) The date specified in accordance with subsection (9)(a) must not be earlier than (a) in the case of a periodic tenancy, the date on which the tenancy could, apart from this Part, be brought to an end by notice to quit given by the landlord on the same day as the notice under this section; (b) in the case of a secure tenancy for a term certain, one month after the date of the service of the notice. 6. Section 84A of the 1985 Act provides, so far as relevant: (1) If the court is satisfied that any of the following conditions is met, it must make an order for the possession of a dwelling-house let under a secure tenancy. This is subject to subsection (2) (and to any available defence based on the tenant's Convention rights, within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 1998). (2) Subsection (1) applies only where the landlord has complied with any obligations it has under section 85ZA (review of decision to seek possession). (6) Condition 4 is that (a) the dwelling-house is or has been subject to a closure order under section 80 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, and (b) access to the dwelling-house has been prohibited (under the closure order or under a closure notice issued under section 76 of that Act) for a continuous period of more than 48 hours. 7. As foreshadowed both by section 83ZA(3) and section 84A (2), section 85ZA gives certain tenants the right to request a review of a landlord s decision to seek a possession order. Those tenants include tenants of a local housing authority. Section 85ZA provides, so far as relevant: (2) Such a request must be made in writing before the end of the period of 7 days beginning with the day on which the notice under section 83ZA is served. (3) On a request being duly made to it, the landlord must review its decision.
5 (4) The landlord must notify the tenant in writing of the decision on the review. (5) If the decision is to confirm the original decision, the landlord must also notify the tenant of the reasons for the decision. (6) The review must be carried out, and the tenant notified, before the day specified in the notice under section 83ZA as the day after which proceedings for the possession of the dwellinghouse may be begun. 8. The detailed procedure applicable to the review is laid down by the Absolute Ground for Possession for Anti-social Behaviour (Review Procedure) (England) Regulations Similar regulations apply to Wales. Regulation 2 deals with the content of the application for a review. It must state (among other things) the tenant s name and address; the grounds on which the review is sought; whether the tenant requires an oral hearing and whether the tenant is willing to receive communications by . If the review is to be conducted without a hearing, the tenant has a minimum of five days in which to make representations: regulation 5. If there is to be a hearing, the landlord must notify the tenant of the date, time and place of the hearing, which must not be earlier than five days after the tenant receives the notification: regulation 6. The landlord has power, at the tenant s request, to postpone the hearing to a later date. The hearing itself may also be adjourned under regulation Mr Harris held his flat under a secure weekly tenancy. Hounslow had been receiving frequent complaints about noise coming from his flat from about October There were also complaints about excessive numbers of visitors loitering in the stairwells, smoking, drinking and drug use. Hounslow first tried to deal with the problem by serving a noise abatement notice; and then by entering into an acceptable behaviour contract with Mr Harris. But the complaints continued. Eventually the police applied to Feltham magistrates court for a three month closure order. On 17 November 2015 the court made such an order, stating that it was satisfied that: a person has engaged, or (if the order is not made) is likely to engage, in disorderly, offensive or criminal behaviour on the premises and that the order is necessary to prevent the behaviour, nuisance or disorder from continuing, recurring or occurring. 10. On 23 December 2015 Hounslow served Mr Harris with a notice seeking possession. The form of the notice complied with all the requirements of section 83ZA of the 1985 Act. It stated that court proceedings for possession might be begun after Monday 25 January In particular the notice also stated (in bold type): You have the right to request a review of the London Borough of Hounslow s decision to seek an order for possession of your dwelling-house. A request for a review must be made in writing before the end of the period of 7 days beginning with the day on which this Notice is served, namely by Wednesday 30 th December 2015.
6 11. Hounslow heard nothing from Mr Harris by 30 December. However, on 4 January 2016 Ash Solicitors, acting on his behalf, ed Hounslow s housing department. The material part of the read: We can confirm that we are in the process of requesting information from the Police regarding the Closure Order against the property. We would request an extension of time in order to request a review of your authority s decision to seek an order for possession against our client. 12. Having not received a reply, Ash ed again on 18 January. That said: Further to your [sic] dated 04 January 2016, whereby we requested a review of your authority s decision to seek an order for possession against our client. We can confirm that we have not yet received a response from you with regards to our request. We would request your confirmation that your authority will review its decision to seek an order for possession against our client. 13. Hounslow s legal department replied on the same day. The reply asserted that there was nothing that required Mr Harris to seek legal advice before requesting a review. The extension of time was refused. There was no further communication from Ash before 25 January Hounslow issued proceedings on 29 January 2016, by which time the only further communication from Ash was simply confirmation that they had instructions to accept service. On 16 August 2016 Hounslow offered to review its decision. The review was completed on 25 August. The upshot was that Hounslow confirmed its decision to proceed. There has been no challenge to that decision. 15. DJ Trigg held: i) There was no valid public law challenge to Hounslow s decision to serve the notice seeking possession on 23 December ii) iii) However, once the request for a review had been made Hounslow ought to have granted an extension of time or (if it had no power to do so) ought to have withdrawn the notice seeking possession and to have served a fresh notice thus starting the clock again. However, the fact that Hounslow did carry out a review during the pendency of the proceedings cured any procedural defect, with the consequence that Hounslow was entitled to the possession order. 16. There is no appeal against the first of DJ Trigg s conclusions. Hounslow argues that it had no power to extend time; that even if it did have such power its refusal to exercise it was lawful; and that DJ Trigg was right to say that any procedural defect was capable of cure by subsequent action. Mr Harris, on the other hand, argues that DJ Trigg was right to say that Hounslow s refusal of an extension of time, or its failure to
7 withdraw the notice was unlawful and, moreover, that section 85ZA (6) has the effect that a failure to carry out the review before beginning proceedings cannot be retrospectively cured. 17. The first question is whether Hounslow had the power to extend time. I do not think that this is quite the right question. Hounslow cannot extend time in the sense of altering the time limit laid down by the 1985 Act. The real question is whether Hounslow had the power to agree to accept an out of time request for a statutory review; or, to put it another way, to waive compliance with the statutory time limit. I have already drawn attention to the statutory guidance which emphasises the speed of the procedure. This is not only reflected in the provisions relating to closure orders but also in the 1985 Act and the Regulations. Thus the notice given under section 83ZA must be served within three months of the making of the closure order. That section also contemplates that the notice will give a date after which proceedings for possession may be begun. The purpose of the procedure is to deal with the most serious cases of anti-social behaviour, which necessarily affect the tenant s neighbours, and it is likely therefore that a responsible landlord will specify as short a time as possible. Since most secure tenancies are held on weekly tenancies, that date is likely to be 28 days after the giving of the notice. But it is also worthy of note that in the case of a fixed term tenancy (of whatever length) the landlord is entitled to give a month s notice. It must also not be forgotten that before the process is set in train there will already have been a hearing in the magistrates court which will have provided a forum for the determination of any contested facts. The date specified in the notice under section 83ZA is the long-stop date for completion of the review, as section 85ZA (6) makes clear. It must follow that, unless the landlord has power to extend that date also, any extension of time for requesting the review might severely curtail the time permitted for the review. There is no express power in section 85ZA of the 1985 Act to extend either the time within which a request should be made or the time by which a review must be concluded. It is common ground that the landlord has no power to extend the time specified in section 85ZA (6) for completion of the review. That is a strong contextual indication that the seven day period for triggering a statutory review cannot be extended or waived either. 18. In some cases the courts have held that where a statutory time limit is imposed for the benefit of one party alone, the party for whose benefit the time limit is imposed may validly waive compliance with it. In Kammins Ballrooms Co Ltd v Zenith Investments (Torquay) Ltd [1971] AC 850 for example (which concerned time limits for making an application for a new business tenancy) Lord Diplock explained at 881 that: where in any Act which merely regulates the rights and obligations of private parties inter se, requirements to be complied with by one of those parties are imposed for the sole benefit of the other party, it would be inconsistent with their purpose if the party intended to be benefited were not entitled to dispense with the other party's compliance in circumstances where it was in his own interest to do so. (Emphasis added) 19. However, running alongside this principle is a different one. Where the right in question engages the public interest, or the interests of third parties, it is not open to an individual to waive compliance: see Broome s Legal Maxims p It is clear, in this case, that the purpose of the mandatory ground for possession is to
8 provide swifter relief for victims, witnesses and the community. In my judgment that purpose plainly engages the public interest. In other words, the seven day time limit was not introduced for the sole benefit of the landlord. 20. The text of the statute leads to the same conclusion. The landlord s obligation to conduct the review only arises under section 85ZA (3) if a request for a review is duly made. The only requirement contained in the primary legislation (as opposed to the regulations) is that the request must be made within seven days. It must follow that a request is only duly made if it is made within that seven day period. This feeds into section 84A (2) which permits reliance on the mandatory ground only where the landlord has complied with any obligations it has under section 85ZA. If the landlord has no obligations under section 85ZA, because no request for a review has been made in time, then section 84A (2) cannot bite. 21. Mr Katz submitted on behalf of Mr Harris that the right to a review was an integral part of the package of reforms which introduced the mandatory ground for possession. However, in my judgment, that is over-stated. The mandatory ground for possession applies to all secure tenancies. But the statutory right to review is restricted to tenants of local housing authorities and housing action trusts: section 85ZA (1). There are many other landlords whose tenants are secure tenants: housing associations and development corporations among them: section 79. So not all secure tenants are entitled to a statutory review. It must follow, therefore, that the right to a statutory review is not necessarily an integral part of the reforms. Mr Katz also submitted that there was a difference in kind between the seven day time limit imposed by section 85ZA (2) and the time limit imposed by section 85ZA (6). Whereas the former is unequivocally imposed by the Act itself, the latter is a function of the choice of date that the landlord inserts in the notice seeking possession. If a landlord is concerned that a late request for a review might not leave enough time in which to conduct the review, its remedy lies in its own hands: it should simply specify a later date in the notice seeking possession. I do not accept this submission. First, the very fact that the Act itself lays down the seven day time limit underlines its importance. Second, given that the procedure in question is intended for the most serious cases of anti-social behaviour it is unrealistic to suppose that landlords will allow more time than is needed on the off-chance that the tenant will fail to exercise the statutory right which the legislation requires to be explained to him in the notice itself. The victims of the anti-social behaviour would be rightly concerned if their landlord was not doing everything possible to remove as quickly as possible what Mr Katz rightly characterised as a blight on housing estates up and down the country. Third, it would place unnecessary strain on local authority resources if it had to deal on a case by case basis with applications for extensions of time. Fourth, the application of the seven day time limit is a clear, readily ascertainable and workable rule. 22. I would hold, therefore, that a tenant who requests a statutory review outside the seven day period laid down by section 85ZA (2) is not entitled to a statutory review and the landlord has no obligation or power to conduct one. It follows that the fetter imposed by section 84A (2) does not apply. 23. On the basis that, as I would hold, the landlord has no power to conduct a statutory review if the tenant is out of time in making his request, Mr Katz argued that the landlord had an obligation to serve a fresh notice seeking possession if the tenant s failure to make a request in time was outside his control. The service of a fresh notice
9 would give the tenant a further window of seven days in which to request a statutory review. I reject this submission. If, as I consider, the landlord has no power to conduct a statutory review if a request is made out of time, that is because Parliament has made that choice. It has made that choice in the interests of bringing speedy relief to the victims of anti-social behaviour and the community. To say that a landlord had a duty to restart the clock would run counter to that legislative purpose. Even if the landlord had a power (as opposed to a duty) to serve a fresh notice superseding one that had already been served, it would need to have good reason to do so, particularly in the light of the legislative purpose of bringing speedy relief to the victims of antisocial behaviour. 24. In addition that submission fails on the facts of the case. In the first place, I cannot see that a landlord could have a duty to serve a fresh notice unless it was asked to do so. No such request was ever made. Second, I do not consider that a landlord could have a duty to serve a fresh notice unless there was some ground for supposing that a review might lead to a different decision being made, and for that purpose a landlord would need to know the grounds upon which the review was being sought (as indeed regulation 2 requires). I do not criticise Ash for not having put forward any grounds for review in their first communication of 4 January. They had only just been instructed. But Hounslow did not reject the request on 4 January. Ash wrote again on 18 January. It is worth noting that the gap between the two communications was 14 days: twice as long as the period allowed for requesting a review, and even in that second communication Ash put forward no ground to support the request. I do not consider that there can be any serious criticism of Hounslow for rejecting the request for a review in the absence of any indication of the grounds upon which the review was requested. There was no good reason for Hounslow to serve a fresh notice. 25. Mr Katz argued that once the seven day time limit had expired the landlord could not simply shut its eyes. Ms Conlan, for Hounslow, agreed. But her submission was that although Mr Harris was not entitled to a statutory review, Hounslow would need to take a series of decisions in the course of the proceedings, any of which might be the subject of challenge on public law grounds. She relied in support of that submission on the judgment of Waller LJ in Central Bedfordshire Council v Housing Action Zone Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 613; [2010] 1 WLR 446 in which he said at [40]: An authority such as the council in the instant appeals may make a decision on the facts as known to it to send a letter seeking possession. Prima facie it has no obligation to find out what the true facts are and the burden is going to be on the occupier to demonstrate any grounds relied on as providing an article 8 defence. If the occupier informs the public authority of relevant circumstances, the public authority will have to take a further decision as to whether to commence proceedings. If no letter is received and the facts are only divulged just prior to the hearing, the public authority in reality has to take a further decision as to whether to proceed. Indeed, if the revelation is only during the hearing, the council in deciding to continue to press for an order takes yet a further decision. I do not see why, if any one of these decisions could be shown to be
10 unreasonable whatever that means (and I will come back to that), it could not be attacked. 26. In his concurring judgment Lloyd LJ said at [62]: the issue is whether the decision of the council to recover possession was an improper exercise of its powers at common law. In the circumstances of this case, I agree with Waller LJ that this question should be applied by reference to the council's decision to press for a possession order at trial, rather than at the outset when it knew little or nothing of the circumstances of the defendants. I recognise that, at that stage, there may not have been a formal decision, and that the decision to proceed, whether express or implicit, is likely to have been taken at a delegated level, not by members of the council in person. Any lack of formality at that stage is not a defect in itself. 27. This, submitted Ms Conlan, was the general application of public law principles to any decision taken by a public authority. It was emphatically not a statutory review under section 85ZA. Consequently there was no bar to the making of a possession order on the sole ground of defence: namely that a statutory review had not been conducted. I agree; and I add that the general application of public law principles to decisions of a local authority landlord must not be allowed to undermine the legislative scheme of this mandatory ground for possession. 28. My conclusions on these issues are dispositive of the appeal. The remaining issues do not arise. Accordingly, for these reasons, which differ from those given by DJ Trigg, I would dismiss the appeal. Lord Justice Flaux: 29. I agree. Lord Justice Gross: 30. I also agree.
ANTI-S0CIAL BEHAVIOUR: RECOVERY OF POSSESSION ON DWELLING HOUSES BASED ON ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
7 ANTI-S0CIAL BEHAVIOUR: RECOVERY OF POSSESSION ON DWELLING HOUSES BASED ON ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR This document is published by Practical Law and can be found at: uk.practicallaw.com/4-620-1533 Request
More informationAnti-social Behaviour Act 2003
Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 CHAPTER 38 CONTENTS PART 1 PREMISES WHERE DRUGS USED UNLAWFULLY 1 Closure notice 2 Closure order 3 Closure order: enforcement 4 Closure of premises: offences 5 Extension
More informationBefore : LADY JUSTICE ARDEN and LORD JUSTICE BRIGGS Between : - and -
Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWCA Civ 1034 Case No: B5/2016/0387 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM Civil and Family Justice Centre His Honour Judge N Bidder QC 3CF00338 Royal Courts
More informationAnti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 2014 CHAPTER 12 An Act to make provision about anti-social behaviour, crime and disorder, including provision about recovery of possession of dwelling-houses;
More informationNotices under Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 Timing and prescribed form
Notices under Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 Timing and prescribed form In this paper I set out the amendments and additions that have been made to section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 by sections 35-37
More informationSection 8 Grounds for Possession Clauses
Landlords who are serving a Section 8 notice should insert the full text of each ground they are relying on into question 3 of the Section 8 Notice. You may need to use a continuation sheet if necessary.
More informationSCHEDULE 3 M HOUSING ACT Grounds for Possession
SCHEDULE 3 M HOUSING ACT 1988 Grounds for Possession GROUND 1 Not later than the beginning of the tenancy the landlord gave notice in writing to the tenant that possession might be recovered on this ground
More informationCaravan Sites (Security of Tenure)
Caravan Sites (Security of Tenure) CONTENTS Secure tenancy 1 Secure tenancy 2 Termination of secure tenancy: court order 3 Proceedings for possession: anti-social behaviour Introductory tenancy 4 Introductory
More informationAnti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill
EXPLANATORY NOTES Explanatory notes to the Bill, prepared by the Home Office, are published separately as HL Bill 2 EN. EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Lord Taylor of Holbeach has made the following
More informationBefore : LORD JUSTICE MAURICE KAY (Vice President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division) and LORD JUSTICE RIMER
Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWCA Civ 164 Case No: T2/2010/1717 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE SPECIAL IMMIGRATION APPEALS COMMISSION REF NO: SC732009
More informationBefore: LORD JUSTICE BRIGGS and LORD JUSTICE SALES Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWCA Civ 1260 Case No: C1/2016/0625 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT (QUEEN S BENCH) THE HON. MR JUSTICE JAY CO33722015 Royal Courts
More informationOnline Case 8 Parvez. Mooney Everett Solicitors Ltd
125 Online Case 8 Parvez v Mooney Everett Solicitors Ltd [2018] 1 Costs LO 125 Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 62 (QB) High Court of Justice, Queen s Bench Division, Sheffield District Registry 19
More informationASB Reforms. Baljit Basra Partner
ASB Reforms Baljit Basra Partner Baljit.basra@anthonycollins.com 30 th September 2014 ASB Crime and Policing Act 2014 Injunctions CBOs and Closure orders Possession Strategic Issues Injunctions Power to
More informationThese materials and slides are intended for guidance only and not as a substitute for legal advice or using formal reference documents such as
These materials and slides are intended for guidance only and not as a substitute for legal advice or using formal reference documents such as current legislation and case law. Legislation Anti-Social
More informationHomelessness Reduction Bill
Homelessness Reduction Bill CONTENTS Threatened homelessness 1 Meaning of threatened with homelessness Advisory services 2 Duty to provide advisory services Assessments and plans 3 Duty to assess all eligible
More informationJUDGMENT. Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hounslow (Respondents) v Powell (Appellant) Leeds City Council (Respondent) v Hall (Appellant)
Hilary Term [2011] UKSC 8 On appeal from: [2010] EWCA Civ 336 JUDGMENT Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hounslow (Respondents) v Powell (Appellant) Leeds City Council (Respondent) v Hall (Appellant)
More informationSECTION 21 NOTICES FROM 1 OCTOBER Deregulation Act 2015 ss.33-41; Housing Act 1988
SECTION 21 NOTICES FROM 1 OCTOBER 2015 Deregulation Act 2015 ss.33-41; Housing Act 1988 The Deregulation Act 2015 introduces a raft of new measures controlling assured shorthold tenancies ( ASTs ). Practitioners
More informationBefore : THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES LORD JUSTICE GROSS and MR JUSTICE MITTING Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWCA Crim 2434 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM CAMBRIDGE CROWN COURT His Honour Judge Hawksworth T20117145 Before : Case No: 2012/02657 C5 Royal
More informationBefore: NEIL CAMERON QC Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge. Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWHC 2647 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/2272/2016 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 28/10/2016
More informationAhmad Al-Naimi (t/a Buildmaster Construction Services) v. Islamic Press Agency Inc [2000] APP.L.R. 01/28
CA on Appeal from High Court of Justice TCC (HHJ Bowsher QC) before Waller LJ; Chadwick LJ. 28 th January 2000. JUDGMENT : Lord Justice Waller: 1. This is an appeal from the decision of His Honour Judge
More informationBoard Member s Conference 2013 Legal Update Where are we now?
Board Member s Conference 2013 Legal Update Where are we now? Jonathan Hulley, Head of Housing and Asset Management Clarke Willmott LLP T: 0845 209 1594 E: jonathan.hulley@clarkewillmott.com W: www.clarkewillmott.com
More informationCourt Changes and Mandatory possession SLCNG Annual Conference 2014 Helen Tucker and Baljit Basra, Partners Housing Litigation Team
Court Changes and Mandatory possession SLCNG Annual Conference 2014 Helen Tucker and Baljit Basra, Partners Housing Litigation Team Court changes Single county court from April 2014 No big deal? Application
More informationAnti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 CHAPTER 12 ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR, CRIME AND POLICING ACT 2014 PART 1 INJUNCTIONS Injunctions 1 Power to grant injunctions 2 Meaning of anti-social behaviour
More informationHousing Act 1996 Part 7. incorporating pending amendments under the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017
Housing Act 1996 Part 7 incorporating pending amendments under the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 Housing Act 1996 Part 7 incorporating pending amendments 2 Purpose of this guide Part 7 of the Housing
More informationRESPONSE TO TACKLING ROGUE LANDLORDS AND IMPROVING THE PRIVATE RENTAL SECTOR
RESPONSE TO TACKLING ROGUE LANDLORDS AND IMPROVING THE PRIVATE RENTAL SECTOR About the RLA The RLA represents over 20,000 landlords across England & Wales. Primarily our members are landlords in their
More informationBefore: CHRISTOPHER SYMONS QC Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2009] EWHC 228 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/4765/2008 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 13
More informationHousing Act 1996, Part 7
1 Housing Act 1996, Part 7 As it would read if the Homelessness Reduction Bill as introduced to the House of Lords on 30 January 2017 is enacted without further amendment. Black text = currently in force
More informationRent Act 1977 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS CHAPTER 42. Controlled and regulated tenancies. Protected and statutory tenancies.
Rent Act 1977 CHAPTER 42 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Protected and statutory tenancies Section 1. Protected tenants and tenancies. 2. Statutory tenants and tenancies. 3. Terms and conditions
More informationBefore: LORD JUSTICE CARNWATH LORD JUSTICE LLOYD and LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWCA Civ 1606 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL (ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER) JUDGE EDWARD JACOBS GIA/2098/2010 Before: Case No:
More informationFood Hygiene Rating Act (Northern Ireland) 2016
Food Hygiene Rating Act (Northern Ireland) 2016 CHAPTER 3 6.00 Food Hygiene Rating Act (Northern Ireland) 2016 CHAPTER 3 1. Food hygiene rating 2. Notification and publication 3. Appeal 4. Request for
More informationBefore : MR JUSTICE LEGGATT Between : LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES. - and
Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWCA Civ 3292 (QB) Case No: QB/2012/0301 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE KINGSTON COUNTY COURT HER HONOUR JUDGE JAKENS 2KT00203 Royal
More informationResidential Tenancy Branch Rules of Procedure
Table of Contents Table of Contents... 1 Definitions... 6 Rule 1 Objective... 8 1.1 Objective... 8 Rule 2 Making a claim... 8 2.1 Starting an Application for Dispute Resolution... 8 2.2 Identifying issues
More informationAntisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Bill
Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Bill [AS AMENDED AT STAGE 2] CONTENTS Section PART 1 ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR STRATEGIES 1 Antisocial behaviour strategies 3 Reports and information 3A Scottish Ministers
More informationBefore : THE HON. MR JUSTICE POPPLEWELL Between : DACORUM BOROUGH COUNCIL
Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWHC 2094 (QB) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION On Appeal from the County Court at Watford Case No: QB/2017/0031 Royal Courts of Justice, Rolls Building
More informationHarry Fitzhugh v Anthony Fitzhugh
Page1 Harry Fitzhugh v Anthony Fitzhugh Case No: A3/2011/3117 Court of Appeal (Civil Division) 1 June 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 694 2012 WL 1933439 Before: Lord Justice Longmore Lord Justice Rimer and Lord
More informationRECENT CHANGES IN ASB LAW
RECENT CHANGES IN ASB LAW Mary Martil Batchelors Solicitors For 21 July 2014 What s New? Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 Received Royal Assent on 13 March 2014 As of 13 May 2014 Absolute
More informationMental Capacity (Amendment) Bill [HL]
Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill [HL] MARSHALLED LIST OF AMENDMENTS TO BE MOVED IN COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE The amendments have been marshalled in accordance with the Instruction of 18th July 2018,
More informationNeighbourhood Planning Bill
[AS AMENDED IN PUBLIC BILL COMMITTEE] CONTENTS PART 1 PLANNING Neighbourhood planning 1 Duty to have regard to post-examination neighbourhood development plan 2 Status of approved neighbourhood development
More informationHomelessness Reduction Bill
Homelessness Reduction Bill (Bob Blackman) (Second Reading 28 October) Homelessness Reduction Bill A Bill to amend the Housing Act 1996 to make provision about measures for reducing homelessness; and for
More informationCosts Awards in Planning Appeals
Costs Awards in Planning Appeals Introduction Q1 Who can apply for costs? Q2 In what cases can I apply for my costs? Q3 Can costs be awarded only if my appeal proceeds by a public local inquiry or a hearing?
More informationAbsconding Clients what to do if your defendant has absconded
Absconding Clients what to do if your defendant has absconded Purpose: Scope of application: Issued by: To provide assistance to barristers who conduct hearings where their client has absconded. All practising
More informationGENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS
PRACTICE DIRECTION PART 44 DIRECTIONS RELATING TO PART 44 GENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS SECTION 7 SOLICITOR S DUTY TO NOTIFY CLIENT: RULE 44.2 7.1 For the purposes of rule 44.2 client includes a party for
More informationPOST-ACTION PROTOCOL PART II LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1954
POST-ACTION PROTOCOL PART II LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1954 Introduction 1. Business tenancy renewals are governed by Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (the 1954 Act ) and Part 56 of the CPR (and
More informationHousing and Planning Bill
EXPLANATORY NOTES Explanatory notes to the Bill, prepared by the Department for Communities and Local Government, are published separately as HL Bill 87 EN. EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Baroness
More informationSection 8 Possession Proceedings
Section 8 Possession Proceedings Miriam Seitler Landmark Chambers 5 th June 2018 1 Section 5, Housing Act 1988 (1) An assured tenancy cannot be brought to an end by the landlord except by (a) obtaining
More informationPOLICY BRIEFING Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill 2013
Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill 2013 Author: Juliet Morris, LGiU associate Date: 30 May 2013 Summary This briefing summarises the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill 2013 which
More informationI want to apply for possession and to claim payment for rent arrears how do I do this?
Where can I get advice? Please note that staff in the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service cannot give you legal advice on your situation, although they can explain and help you to understand the Tribunal
More informationLondon Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill
London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill [AS AMENDED ON REPORT] CONTENTS Introductory 1 Interpretation of principal terms 2 Alteration of Olympic documents The Olympic Delivery Authority 3 Establishment
More informationASB The Changing Landscape
ASB The Changing Landscape CIH Midlands Region March 2013 Gail Sykes, Partner Tel: 01733 888794 Email: gail.sykes@buckles-law.co.uk www.buckles-law.co.uk Possession Proceedings and Proportionality Summary
More information1992 No TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, ENGLAND AND WALES
STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 1992 No. 2832 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, ENGLAND AND WALES The Town and Country Planning (Modification and Discharge of Planning Obligations) Regulations 1992 Made - - - - 9th November
More informationImmigration Bill [AS AMENDED IN PUBLIC BILL COMMITTEE] CONTENTS PART 1
[AS AMENDED IN PUBLIC BILL COMMITTEE] CONTENTS PART 1 LABOUR MARKET AND ILLEGAL WORKING Director of Labour Market Enforcement 1 Director of Labour Market Enforcement 2 Labour market enforcement strategy
More informationBhimani (Student: Switching Institution: Requirements) [2014] UKUT (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ALLEN.
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Bhimani (Student: Switching Institution: Requirements) [2014] UKUT 00516 (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House On 30 September 2014 Determination
More information2005 No. [ ] AGRICULTURE, ENGLAND FOOD, ENGLAND. The Official Feed and Food Controls (England) Regulations 2005
APPENDIX 1 5th draft : 22..3.05, LEG 24/946 STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2005 No. [ ] AGRICULTURE, ENGLAND FOOD, ENGLAND The Official Feed and Food Controls (England) Regulations 2005 Made - - - - 2005 Laid before
More informationBERMUDA RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BERMUDA BX 1 / 1965
QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BERMUDA BX 1 / 1965 [made under section 9 of the Court of Appeal Act 1964 and brought into operation on 2 August 1965] TABLE OF CONTENTS
More informationMott MacDonald Ltd v London & Regional Properties Ltd [2007] Adj.L.R. 05/23
JUDGMENT : HHJ Anthony Thornton QC. TCC. 23 rd May 2007 1. Introduction 1. The claimant, Mott MacDonald Ltd ( MM ) is a specialist engineering multi-disciplinary consultancy providing services to the construction
More informationBefore: LORD JUSTICE THORPE and LORD JUSTICE MAURICE KAY IN THE MATTER OF C (Children)
Case No: B4/2009/1315 Neutral Citation Number: [2009] EWCA Civ 994 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE WILLESDEN COUNTY COURT (HIS HONOUR JUDGE COPLEY)
More informationBefore: LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN LORD JUSTICE TOMLINSON and LORD JUSTICE LEWISON Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWCA Civ 1386 Case No: C1/2014/2773, 2756 and 2874 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEENS BENCH DIVISION PLANNING COURT
More informationDisability Discrimination Act CHAPTER 13 CONTENTS. Go to Preamble. Public authorities
Disability Discrimination Act 2005 2005 CHAPTER 13 CONTENTS Go to Preamble Public authorities 1. Councillors and members of the Greater London Authority 2. Discrimination by public authorities 3. Duties
More informationHousing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996
Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 Page 1 Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 1996 CHAPTER 53 Thomson Reuters (Legal) Limited. UK Statutes Crown Copyright. Reproduced
More informationWHERE NOW SUMAL? THE IMPLICATIONS OF BRENT LONDON BOROUGH COUNCIL v SANJAY SHAH & OTHERS. and
WHERE NOW SUMAL? THE IMPLICATIONS OF BRENT LONDON BOROUGH COUNCIL v SANJAY SHAH & OTHERS and THE AVAILABILITY OF CONFISCATION PURSUANT TO THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 2002 IN RELATION TO VARIOUS CRIMINAL
More informationJUDGMENT. Eclipse Film Partners No 35 LLP (Appellant) v Commissioners for Her Majesty s Revenue and Customs (Respondent)
Easter Term [2016] UKSC 24 On appeals from: [2014] EWCA Civ 184 JUDGMENT Eclipse Film Partners No 35 LLP (Appellant) v Commissioners for Her Majesty s Revenue and Customs (Respondent) before Lord Neuberger,
More informationLiquor Amendment (3 Strikes) Act 2011 No 58
New South Wales Liquor Amendment (3 Strikes) Act 2011 No 58 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 Schedule 1 Amendment of Liquor Act 2007 No 90 3 New South Wales Liquor Amendment (3 Strikes) Act
More informationJUDGMENT. In the matter of an application by Hugh Jordan for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)
Hilary Term [2019] UKSC 9 On appeal from: [2015] NICA 66 JUDGMENT In the matter of an application by Hugh Jordan for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) before Lady Hale, President Lord Reed, Deputy President
More informationSunshine Coast Regional Council Local Law No. 1 (Administration) 2011
Sunshine Coast Regional Council Local Law No. 1 (Administration) 2011 CONSOLIDATED VERSION NO.2 as in force on 5 February 2016 adopted by Sunshine Coast Regional Council on 15 September 2016 pursuant to
More informationThe Queen on the application of Yonas Admasu Kebede (1)
Neutral Citation Number: [2013] EWCA 960 Civ IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Timothy Straker QC (sitting as
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL RULES, 1997 (C.I 19)
COURT OF APPEAL RULES, 1997 (C.I 19) IN exercise of the powers conferred on the Rules of Court Committee by Article 157(2) of the Constitution these Rules are made this 24th day of July, 1997. PART I-GENERAL
More informationPlanning (Scotland) Bill [AS INTRODUCED]
Planning (Scotland) Bill [AS INTRODUCED] CONTENTS Section PART 1 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING Development planning 1 National Planning Framework 2 Removal of requirement to prepare strategic development plans
More informationLondon Olympics Bill
London Olympics Bill EXPLANATORY NOTES Explanatory notes to the Bill, prepared by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, are published separately as Bill 4 EN. EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL (IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER) McCloskey J and UT Judge Lindsley.
Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWCA Civ 5 C2/2015/3947 & C2/2015/3948 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL (IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER) McCloskey J and UT Judge
More informationBefore : LORD JUSTICE MCFARLANE LORD JUSTICE BRIGGS and LORD JUSTICE FLAUX Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWCA Civ 355 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM CARDIFF CIVIL AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTRE District Judge T M Phillips b44ym322 Before : Case No: A2/2016/1422
More informationLocal Court Amendment (Company Title Home Unit Disputes) Act 2013 No 6
New South Wales Local Court Amendment (Company Title Home Unit Disputes) Act 2013 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 Schedule 1 Amendment of Local Court Act 2007 No 93 3 New South Wales Local
More informationVictorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2008
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2008 TABLE OF PROVISIONS Rule Page ORDER 1 PRELIMINARY 1 1.01 Object 1 1.02 Authorising provisions 1 1.03 Commencement 1 1.04 Revocation 1 1.05 Definition
More informationPlanning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Page 1 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 1990 CHAPTER 9 Sweet & Maxwell Ltd. UK Statutes Crown Copyright. Reproduced
More informationPractice Guidance: McKenzie Friends (Civil and Family Courts)
Practice Guidance: McKenzie Friends (Civil and Family Courts) 1) This Guidance applies to civil and family proceedings in the Court of Appeal (Civil Division), the High Court of Justice, the County Courts
More informationR v JAMES BINNING RULING ON COSTS. 1. On 18 October 2012 Dean Henderson-Smith died as a result of falling
IN THE OXFORD CROWN COURT HHJ ECCLES QC R v JAMES BINNING RULING ON COSTS 1. On 18 October 2012 Dean Henderson-Smith died as a result of falling through a Perspex skylight in the roof of a large barn known
More information2009 No (L. 20) TRIBUNALS AND INQUIRIES
S T A T U T O R Y I N S T R U M E N T S 2009 No. 1976 (L. 20) TRIBUNALS AND INQUIRIES The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 Made - - - - 16th July 2009 Laid
More informationEDUCATION AND SKILLS BILL
EDUCATION AND SKILLS BILL EXPLANATORY NOTES ON LORDS AMENDMENTS INTRODUCTION 1. These explanatory notes relate to the Lords Amendments to the Education and Skills Bill, as brought from the House of Lords
More informationRent (Scotland) Act 1984
Rent (Scotland) Act 1984 CHAPTER 58 A Table showing the derivation of the provisions of this consolidation Act will be found at the end of the Act. The Table has no official status. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2009-02708 BETWEEN SYDNEY ORR APPLICANT AND THE POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr. Justice A. des Vignes
More informationHousing (Scotland) Bill
Housing (Scotland) Bill [AS INTRODUCED] CONTENTS Section 1 Abolition of the right to buy 2 Amendment of right to buy provisions PART 1 RIGHT TO BUY PART 2 SOCIAL HOUSING Allocation of social housing 3
More informationLandlord and Tenant. Act 1987 CHAPTER 31
Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 CHAPTER 31 First Published 1987 Reprinted 2000 Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 CHAPTER 31 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I TENANTS' RIGHTS OF FIRST REFUSAL Section Preliminary
More informationBefore : LADY JUSTICE ARDEN LORD JUSTICE LEWISON LADY JUSTICE ASPLIN Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWCA Civ 62 Case No: A3/2017/2781 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, COMMERCIAL COURT Mr Richard Salter QC sitting as a Deputy
More informationPrevention of Terrorism Act 2005
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 2005 Chapter 2 CONTENTS Control orders Section 1 Power to make control orders 2 Making of non-derogating control orders 3 Supervision by court of making of non-derogating
More informationLORDS AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNTER-TERRORISM AND SECURITY BILL
LORDS AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNTER-TERRORISM AND SECURITY BILL [The page and line references are to HL Bill 75, the bill as first printed for the Lords.] 1 Page 1, line 8, at end insert Clause 1 ( ) In Schedule
More informationLocal Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL] EXPLANATORY NOTES Explanatory notes to the Bill, prepared by the Department for Communities and Local Government, are published separately
More informationA nightmare for social landlords and their tenants?
A nightmare for social landlords and their tenants? Jonathan Manning and Sarah Salmon, Barristers, both at Arden Chambers and Bethan Gladwyn, Senior Associate and Head of Housing Management and Rebecca
More informationHomelessness etc. (Scotland) Bill
Homelessness etc. (Scotland) Bill [AS PASSED] CONTENTS Section Homelessness: priority need for accommodation 1 Amendment of section 2 of the 1987 Act 2 Abolition of priority need test 3 Statement on abolition
More informationCuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03
JUDGMENT : Master Haworth : Costs Court. 3 rd September 2008 1. This is an appeal pursuant to CPR Rule 47.20 from a decision of Costs Officer Martin in relation to a detailed assessment which took place
More informationImmigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill
Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill EXPLANATORY NOTES Explanatory notes to the Bill, prepared by the Home Office, are published separately as Bill 13 EN. EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Mr Secretary
More informationNEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING BILL EXPLANATORY NOTES
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING BILL EXPLANATORY NOTES What these notes do These Explanatory tes relate to the Neighbourhood Planning Bill as introduced in the House of Commons on 7. These Explanatory tes have
More informationOffaly Local Authorities
Offaly Local Authorities Anti-Social Behaviour Strategy 2015 Presented to the Housing SPC on 25 th Nov 2015 Presented to Offaly County Council JPC on 7th Dec 2015 Adopted by Offaly County Council on 18
More informationThe Labour Court. Workplace Relations Act Labour Court (Employment Rights Enactments) Rules 2016
The Labour Court Workplace Relations Act 2015 Labour Court (Employment Rights Enactments) Rules 2016 These Rules are made pursuant to section 20 of the Industrial Relations Act 1946 as amended by section
More informationASB, Prevention or Cure?
Learn with us. Improve with us. Influence with us www.cih.org ASB, Prevention or Cure? Gez Kinsella, CIH ASB Consultant Overview Understanding the impact of Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act
More informationApplicant Seal PENAL NOTICE ]1 DISOBEY THIS ORDER YOU MAY BE HELD TO BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND MAY BE IMPRISONED, FINED OR HAVE YOUR ASSETS SEIZED.
FREEZING INJUNCTION Before The Honourable Mr Justice IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE [ ] DIVISION [ ] Claim No. Dated Applicant Seal Respondent Name, address and reference of Respondent PENAL NOTICE IF YOU
More informationAnimal Welfare Act 2006
Animal Welfare Act 2006 CHAPTER 45 Explanatory Notes have been produced to assist in the understanding of this Act and are available separately 9 00 Animal Welfare Act 2006 CHAPTER 45 CONTENTS Introductory
More informationREQUEST FOR THE COUNCIL S CONSTITUTION TO BE AMENDED TO ADOPT NEW POWERS UNDER THE ANTI- SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR CRIME AND POLICING ACT 2014
Report To: COUNCIL Date: 10 October 2017 Executive Officer: Subject: Member/Reporting Councillor Allison Gwynne Executive Member Clean and Green Ian Saxon Assistant Director (Environmental Services) REQUEST
More informationB e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE LEWISON LORD JUSTICE FLOYD
A2/2014/1626 Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWCA Civ 984 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE MANCHESTER DISTRICT REGISTRY QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (HIS HONOUR JUDGE ARMITAGE QC) Royal
More information1996 No ROAD TRAFFIC
S T A T U T O R Y I N S T R U M E N T S 1996 No. 2489 ROAD TRAFFIC The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 Made - - - - 26th September 1996 Laid before Parliament
More informationJUDGMENT. R v Varma (Respondent)
Michaelmas Term [2012] UKSC 42 On appeal from: [2010] EWCA Crim 1575 JUDGMENT R v Varma (Respondent) before Lord Phillips Lord Mance Lord Clarke Lord Dyson Lord Reed JUDGMENT GIVEN ON 10 October 2012 Heard
More informationBefore: SIR WYN WILLIAMS sitting as a Judge of the High Court Between: - and
Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 1412 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION PLANNING COURT Case No: CO/5456/2017 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 8 June
More information