London Borough of Haringey v Simawi

London Borough of Haringey v Simawi

The court has discretion to determine an issue rendered academic between the parties if it is of general public importance, affects a significant number of cases, and the costs burden on the objecting party is justified. In this case, the issue of compatibility of ss.87-88 Housing Act 1985 with Articles 8 and 14 of the Human Rights Act 1998 is of sufficient importance and complexity to warrant determination even if it becomes academic.

Parties
Claimant: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Haringey; Defendant: Mulkhis Simawi; Interested Party: The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Possession Proceedings / Interlocutory Ruling on Whether to Determine an Academic Issue
Outcome
Court will exercise discretion to determine Ground 1 (the incompatibility issue) even if it becomes academic due to settlement.
Legal Topics
Statutory Succession, Discrimination, Declaration of Incompatibility, Judicial Discretion, Human Rights Act 1998, Housing Act 1985
Housing Law Public Law Human Rights Statutory Succession Discrimination Declaration of Incompatibility Judicial Discretion Human Rights Act 1998 +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Haringey

Claimant

Mulkhis Simawi

Defendant

The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Possession Proceedings / Interlocutory Ruling on Whether to Determine an Academic Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should determine a legal issue that may become academic due to settlement between parties
  2. 2 Whether ss.87-88 Housing Act 1985 are incompatible with Articles 8 and 14 of the Human Rights Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The court has discretion to determine an issue rendered academic between the parties if it is of general public importance, affects a significant number of cases, and the costs burden on the objecting party is justified. In this case, the issue of compatibility of ss.87-88 Housing Act 1985 with Articles 8 and 14 of the Human Rights Act 1998 is of sufficient importance and complexity to warrant determination even if it becomes academic.

Court Disposition

Court will exercise discretion to determine Ground 1 (the incompatibility issue) even if it becomes academic due to settlement.

Orders

  • Directions given for evidence and skeleton arguments to progress determination of Ground 1 at hearing scheduled for 2 October 2018.