Judge calls for clarity amid fears of discrimination claim 'deluge'

Lord Justice Brooke called on parliament to clarify the relationship between the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act and housing law such as the 1985 Housing Act after appeals from two tenants facing eviction for antisocial behaviour.

In cases heard on 18 and 19 May, Manchester council tenants Sharon Romano and Yvonne Samari argued that they suffered from mental illness that qualified them as disabled. Any possession order would be discrimination under the DDA, they said.

The court upheld Manchester County Court's earlier decision that neither could be classed as disabled under the DDA.

But it also decided that, had their behaviour resulted from disability, the landlord would need to prove it had acted to protect the health and safety of other tenants.

Otherwise, it would be guilty of unlawful discrimination.

The court said a landlord could seek a possession order against a disabled tenant if their behaviour was shown to affect the "social wellbeing" of neighbours – for example, by causing insomnia.

The case was related to the March 2003 Court of Appeal ruling in North Devon Homes v Christine Brazier. In this it was proved that the tenant suffered from schizophrenia and behaved antisocially because of the illness.

However, the court decided a possession order could not be justified under the DDA.

But in the Romano and Samari cases, Manchester council's barrister Andrew Arden QC argued that the Brazier judgment had put landlords in a difficult position.

In his judgment, Lord Justice Brooke noted the point and called on parliament to clarify the situations in which landlords would be justified in taking action.

Bill Pitt, head of Manchester council's nuisance strategy group, said: "This case shows you do need to consider the impact of people's behaviour on their neighbours.

"We demonstrated that Romano's behaviour had drastically affected her neighbours' well-being."