Jones v Canal And River Trust [2015] EWHC 534 (QB) (06 March 2015)

Jones v Canal And River Trust [2015] EWHC 534 (QB) (06 March 2015)

The Canal and River Trust, as a non-housing public authority, does not owe Article 8 housing duties to the appellant and no proportionality argument arises; the Article 8 defence is not seriously arguable.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 534
Parties
Defendant / Appellant: Matthew Jones; Claimant / Respondent: Canal and River Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Article 8 ECHR, Proportionality, Public Authority Duties
Public Law Human Rights Article 8 ECHR Proportionality Public Authority Duties

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Jones

Defendant / Appellant

Canal and River Trust

Claimant / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Canal and River Trust owed Article 8 housing duties
  2. 2 Whether proportionality test applies to non-housing public authority
  3. 3 Whether Article 8 argument is seriously arguable

Ratio Decidendi

The Canal and River Trust, as a non-housing public authority, does not owe Article 8 housing duties to the appellant and no proportionality argument arises; the Article 8 defence is not seriously arguable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Paragraphs 10-12 of the appellant's defence struck out
  • No relief granted to appellant