Leeds City Council v Price

A family of Gypsies moved onto council land. Leeds council applied to a court for their eviction on the basis that they were trespassers. The only possible defence was that eviction would interfere with their human rights to respect for their family life and home.

A judge, applying a recent House of Lords decision (Harrow LBC v Qazi), decided that human rights could not amount to a defence and made a possession order.

The family appealed, arguing that Qazi was inconsistent with a later decision of the European Court of Human Rights (Connors v UK). Leeds said Connors was not out of line with Qazi. The Court of Appeal agreed that the decisions were inconsistent, and that Connors applied to all possession cases, but dismissed the family’s appeal.

It said our courts should apply Qazi until it had been reconsidered by the House of Lords in the light of Connors. It granted permission for an urgent appeal to the House of Lords, which has since been lodged.

Source

Housing Today

Reference

This has serious implications for all public authorities and social landlords seeking to evict occupiers who have no defence except their human rights. Pending the decision of the House of Lords, all such claims will either need to be adjourned or, if a possession order is granted, the defendants will appeal and obtain a stay of the order.