Public bodies fight could go to Supreme Court
Housing associations could challenge a court ruling that they are public bodies following a clarification from the judges involved in the case.
Earlier this month London & Quadrant was refused leave to appeal a Court of Appeal decision, made in June, which found housing associations are public bodies when making allocations to social housing and terminating tenancies.
But the judges who rejected the appeal bid have issued a new order saying they would like to try another case which tackles the issue.
In the order issued on 19 November, the judges said they still rejected L&Q’s appeal bid, but the issue of whether housing associations are public bodies ‘was clearly one for the Supreme Court’. The judges, Lords Hope and Brown and Lady Hale, said the L&Q vs Weaver case was not suitable ‘on its facts’ but said that a suitable case that tested the public bodies issue might be allowed to ‘leapfrog’ straight to the Supreme Court.
Nick Billingham, a partner at Devonshires which represented L&Q, said the new order from the judges had ‘left the door open’ for another case to test whether housing associations are public bodies. He said L&Q were not looking for another case to test the public bodies issue.
He added: ‘It is open to another case to jump to the Supreme Court to have the issue finally determined by them but there is no guarantee they would find one way or another.’
Solicitor Yvonne Hossack, who is bringing a series of court cases against care home closures, said the losing party in her cases could appeal and ask the Supreme Court to hear the case on the basis of testing whether associations are public bodies.
She said: ‘We hope to win obviously. Whoever loses should be able to get a leapfrog to the Supreme Court.’ A final judgement in one of her cases, Garbet vs Circle 33, where a resident challenged changes to a warden service in a sheltered housing scheme, had been delayed until the Weaver case was settled and so might be a good test of the public bodies issue.
However Keith Jenkins, partner at law firm Winckworth Sherwood, said he saw little point in finding another case to test the point.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (6)
Joe Halewood | 26/11/2009 3:17 pm
Is the order in the public domain? Searched supreme court site and cant find.
Link anyone?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Junior | 26/11/2009 4:34 pm
Hi Joe go on this websithttp://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/587.htme
and will give full case and look on the National Housing Federation wesbite and see what they think
Yours
Eva
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Junior | 26/11/2009 4:37 pm
Joe if you have any problems then go on the Housing Federation wesbite
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Junior | 26/11/2009 4:46 pm
The case was heard in the High Court on 28 th and 29 th February and judgment was
delivered on 24 th June. The full name of the case is The Queen (on the application
of Susan Weaver) v London & Quadrant Housing Trust and the citation number is
[2008] EWHC 1377 (Admin). The full text of the judgment is available at
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2008/1377. The National Housing
Federation policy contact is John Bryant (johnb@housing.org.uk or 020 7067 1082) because I went back again and was having problems so it have same problems go onto the Housing Federation Website type in the "The Weaver Case"
Yours
Eva
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Junior | 26/11/2009 4:58 pm
Hi Joe www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2008/1377 went back due to a error try this one pr go on the Housing Federation and type in The Weaver Case
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jim Paton | 26/11/2009 4:59 pm
Better still, the text of the "clarified" order is on Nearly Legal.
I don't think you need to go to the NHF site to find out what they think. We know what they think already, don't we?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment