Gaskin, R (On the Application Of) v Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council & Anor [2018] EWHC 1996 (Admin) (31 July 2018)

Gaskin, R (On the Application Of) v Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council & Anor [2018] EWHC 1996 (Admin) (31 July 2018)

Letting and managing private residential accommodation for profit constitutes a 'service' under the Services Directive; the Council's fee scheme, which included costs beyond the authorisation procedures, contravened Article 13(2) of the Directive and Regulation 18(4) of the Services Regulations.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 1996 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Peter Gaskin; First Defendant: Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council; Second Defendant: Lavender Hill & Wimbledon Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment on EU Law Issue
Outcome
Judicial review allowed on EU law ground; Council's fee scheme unlawful under Services Directive.
Legal Topics
Services Directive, HMO Licensing, Authorisation Schemes, Fee Regulation
Administrative Law European Union Law Housing Law Services Directive HMO Licensing Authorisation Schemes Fee Regulation

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Gaskin

Claimant

Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council

First Defendant

Lavender Hill & Wimbledon Magistrates' Court

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment on EU Law Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether letting and managing private residential accommodation for profit constitutes a 'service' under Directive 2006/123/EC (Services Directive)
  2. 2 Whether the fee demanded by the Council for HMO licence renewal contravenes Article 13(2) of the Services Directive

Ratio Decidendi

Letting and managing private residential accommodation for profit constitutes a 'service' under the Services Directive; the Council's fee scheme, which included costs beyond the authorisation procedures, contravened Article 13(2) of the Directive and Regulation 18(4) of the Services Regulations.

Court Disposition

Judicial review allowed on EU law ground; Council's fee scheme unlawful under Services Directive.

Orders

  • Declaration that letting and managing private residential accommodation for profit is a 'service' under Directive 2006/123/EC.
  • Declaration that the Council's fee scheme for HMO licence renewal contravenes Article 13(2) of the Services Directive and Regulation 18(4) of the Services Regulations.