London Borough of Brent v Corcoran & Anor

London Borough of Brent v Corcoran & Anor

The judge erred in law by failing to properly consider the seriousness of the breaches of licence terms, the harassment incident after the possession order, and by misallocating the burden of proof regarding knowledge of criminality. The public law defences based on equality duties and procedural safeguards were without merit. The circumstances did not justify suspension of the possession orders; outright orders should be made.

Parties
Appellant/respondent: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Brent; Respondent/appellant: Margaret Corcoran; Respondent/appellant: Ann O’Donnell
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal, Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Possession Proceedings, Licence Termination, Public Law Defences, Caravan Sites Act 1968, Discretion to Suspend Possession Orders, Race and Disability Discrimination Duties, Article 8 ECHR, Procedural Safeguards
Housing Law Public Law Human Rights Possession Proceedings Licence Termination Public Law Defences Caravan Sites Act 1968 Discretion to Suspend Possession Orders +3 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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Brent

Appellant/respondent

Margaret Corcoran

Respondent/appellant

Ann O’Donnell

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal, Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Brent's decisions to terminate licences and seek possession were unlawful for failure to consider public sector equality duties and procedural safeguards
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in suspending the possession orders under s.4 Caravan Sites Act 1968
  3. 3 Whether the judge failed to properly consider the seriousness of breaches and post-order conduct in exercising discretion to suspend

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in law by failing to properly consider the seriousness of the breaches of licence terms, the harassment incident after the possession order, and by misallocating the burden of proof regarding knowledge of criminality. The public law defences based on equality duties and procedural safeguards were without merit. The circumstances did not justify suspension of the possession orders; outright orders should be made.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Suspension of possession orders set aside; outright possession orders substituted for both respondents.
  • If parties cannot agree final form of orders, submissions to be made in writing within four days.