Case will reveal whether associations are to be treated as public bodies
First Weaver test case to reach court
A High Court case is set to reveal whether housing associations will be treated as public bodies in certain circumstances.
It is set to act as the first test case of the law following a separate judgement involving London & Quadrant tenant Susan Weaver last year.
That judgement had suggested associations could be treated as public bodies when making decisions on the allocation and termination of tenancies.
The latest legal battle concerns Corinne Hart, a shared owner with 11,000-home Catalyst Communities Housing Association in north London.
Her landlord began possession proceedings against her in November 2009, following allegations of nuisance and damage to the property, which she denies.
At a preliminary hearing in June, Ms Hart’s lawyers will claim the housing association is a public body and has breached article six of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Social landlords have been searching for a case to contest the Weaver judgement since it was made in the Court of Appeal last June. Catalyst Communities confirmed it will argue that housing associations do not meet the definition of a public body.
The housing association alleges that Ms Hart made significant alterations to her flat, including putting a shed on a flat roof, which then caused an ongoing leak into the flat below. Ms Hart does not accept these claims.
Steve Chapman, leaseholder and new tenures manager at Catalyst Communities, said: ‘As this case follows Weaver v London & Quadrant, we will be pushing for social landlords to not be considered to be public bodies but the bottom line is that we want the property to be returned to its original condition and the nuisance to neighbours to stop.’
David Dunne, solicitor at Chambers, Rutland and Crauford, is representing Ms Hart.
He said: ‘We see this issue over housing associations’ status as something that does need to be resolved by the courts because of the large number of schemes and tenancies that have been created using this shared ownership scheme.
‘It could affect a lot of people and a lot of landlords and it needs a bit of clarification.’
The Weaver case
In June 2009, the Court of Appeal ruled in the Weaver v London & Quadrant case that housing associations are public bodies open to claims under the Human Rights Act.
Tenant Susan Weaver took L&Q to the High Court over moves to evict her from her south west London home. Her lawyers argued L&Q was breaching her right to ‘family life’. Although the court rejected her claim, it also said housing associations could be seen as public bodies in certain circumstances. This was later upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (4)
macctenantstalk | 24/05/2010 5:58 am
It's simple you can't have one rule for one and not another whilst these cases are complicated.. If social landlords who do have a "certain special responsibility" are getting public funding of any kind they do have to be accountable as a public body or is it now the case as they would have joe tenant to believe they are beyond the law, financial scrutiny and challenge, and at the same time exonerate themselves from the very special responsibility they have to the most vulnerable in society.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 24/05/2010 7:57 pm
I am just a student. My comments are probably going to be ill informed. I thought you are either a public body or your are not.
If the High Court is say that a social landlord could be a public body in certain circumstances, doesn't that mean there is a loophole in their aproach. Perhaps the loophole is in my brain. Regards, Ripon
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
the purple avenger | 25/05/2010 8:43 am
Hi Ripon
you are looking at this too pragmatically. All things associated with the laqw should be black and white - but when you have experienced the world of housing you will understand that there are more shaqdes of grey than you could ever imagine. And the worst thing is ....it needn't be that way.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Geoff Pearse | 26/05/2010 4:16 pm
Many Housing Associations have taken on the lucrative management of leashold developments. In some cases, also established themselves as freeholder landlords as well as managing blocks for private landlords. How will this affect their legal status, if at all?
The Hanover Group have gone even further. They have recently 'rorganised' and made all their estate/housing managers equal in pay and terms of employment. In at least one case, they increased a resident EM's salary so that he could to pay the rent on his flat to a private landlord. Surely, now a 'mongrel' company?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment