Nicholas Dobson reflects on Pinnock, proportionality & possession
Where do county courts stand on proportionality when considering whether to make a housing possession order at the suit of a local authority? The issue has been beset by some labyrinthine complexity as domestic courts have struggled to align the requirements of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) with English law. However, the Supreme Court may have managed to beat a path through the tangled undergrowth in its 3 November 2010 decision in Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45.
The House of Lords had held in three relatively recent cases (Harrow London Borough Council v Qazi [2003] UKHL 43; Kay v Lambeth London Borough Council [2006] UKHL 10 and Doherty v Birmingham City Council [2008] UKHL 57) that it was not open to a residential occupier, against whom possession was being sought by a local authority, to raise a proportionality argument under Art 8. This was because the majority view was that personal interests safeguarded by Art 8 must be taken
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
