Landlords warned there could be a ‘flurry’ of legal activity following ruling
Associations must brace for further challenges
Housing associations have been warned to prepare for further legal challenges after it was ruled that they are public bodies under the Human Rights Act.
Mike Donnellan, head of property litigation at law firm Trowers & Hamlins, said there could be a ‘flurry of activity’ from tenants, similar to the case brought by London & Quadrant tenant Susan Weaver that has sent shock waves through the sector.
Some associations have already briefed staff to ensure paperwork is in order, as it could be used as court evidence. Challenges are also ‘likely to come’ in other areas of law, such as freedom of information and data protection, Mr Donnellan said.
Immediately after the Appeal Court returned its verdict in the Weaver case last week, the National Housing Federation issued a briefing stating there was ‘cause for concern’ that the ruling could impact on associations’ status as private bodies.
The biggest concern is that with the Weaver case as a precedent, further challenges to associations’ status could see them brought under public borrowing restrictions.
‘Classification as a public body does not depend on any single factor, but… on the totality of an organisation’s relationship with the state,’ the NHF said.
The Council of Mortgage Lenders said it would ‘look at the implications any legal ruling may or may not have for lending to housing associations’.
Keith Exford, chief executive of Affinity Sutton, said he was ‘worried’ about the ruling. ‘If it wipes away the possibility of raising finance from the private sector at a time when public sector finances are already parlous, who will cover that?’ he asked.
David Montague, chief executive of L&Q, said the group had taken the case to appeal because it believes ‘the independence of housing associations is vital to our continuing investment’ in housing.
L&Q’s board was due to meet yesterday to decide whether to appeal against the latest decision.
Read a full briefing on the implications of the Weaver v L&Q case
From the judgement
‘In my judgement, the act of termination [of tenancy] is so bound up with the provision of social housing that once the latter is seen, in the context of that particular body, as the exercise of a public function, then acts which are necessarily involved in the regulation of the function must also be public acts.
‘I would dismiss the appeal. In my judgement, the Trust is a hybrid public authority and the act of terminating a tenancy is not a private act.’ Lord Justice Elias
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (1)
Scumbag | 29/06/2009 1:12 pm
Mike Donnellan is talking tosh. Bringing judicial review proceedings is hard work and claimants have to following exacting pre-action protocols informing the proposed defendent of the nature of the claim before going near a court. This gives a 'public authority' the chance to set out why the decision is right or change it.
That it takes the potential threat of judicial review proceeedings before it occurs to "Some associations" to ensure that paperwork is in order eloquently explains the validity of many of the angier comments from tenants that appear from tenants. The Freedom of Information Act only applies to the bodies specified in the Act. The Data Protection Act already applies to RSLs.
A ‘flurry of activity’ no, a flurry of solicitors firms trying to sell RSLs advice that they do not need ,yes.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment