Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council v Mailley [2022] EWHC 2328 (QB) (14 September 2022)

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council v Mailley [2022] EWHC 2328 (QB) (14 September 2022)

The Defendant was not entitled to succeed to her mother's secure tenancy because Mrs Dorothy Mailley ceased to occupy the property as her principal home before her death, ending the secure tenancy. The Claimant failed to offer a review as required by its policy, but this omission would not have altered the outcome...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2328
Parties
Claimant: Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council; Defendant: Marilyn Mailley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Possession Proceedings / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim for possession granted
Legal Topics
Succession of Tenancy, Secure Tenancy, Article 8 ECHR, Lettings Policy, Disability Discrimination, Assignment of Tenancy, Review Rights
Housing Law Human Rights Law Public Law Succession of Tenancy Secure Tenancy Article 8 ECHR Lettings Policy Disability Discrimination +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council

Claimant

Marilyn Mailley

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Possession Proceedings / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant was entitled to succeed to her mother's secure tenancy under Section 87 Housing Act 1985
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant failed to follow its own lettings policy by not offering a review
  3. 3 Whether eviction would breach Article 8 ECHR due to Defendant's mental health

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant was not entitled to succeed to her mother's secure tenancy because Mrs Dorothy Mailley ceased to occupy the property as her principal home before her death, ending the secure tenancy. The Claimant failed to offer a review as required by its policy, but this omission would not have altered the outcome given the Defendant's circumstances. Eviction is not disproportionate under Article 8 ECHR as the Claimant made reasonable efforts to assist and accommodate the Defendant, and the Defendant's mental health issues do not amount to exceptional circumstances warranting retention of the property. Section 87 Housing Act 1985 is not incompatible with Article 14 ECHR in these...

Court Disposition

Claim for possession granted

Orders

  • Possession order for 19 Uffmoor Estate, Halesowen, West Midlands B63 4JR in favour of Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council
  • Defendant to vacate the property by the date specified in the order