Section: Antisocial Behaviour

Case Law Update

The defendant was a council tenant who had had a drink problem. Following a violent assault on a neighbour, he was sentenced to one year imprisonment.
On his release on licence to live elsewhere, the Council obtained an interim ASBO, excluding him from the area where he had lived. He was recalled to serve the rest of his sentence.
On his final release, the Council applied for and was granted a full ASBO - again excluding him from the area in which he had lived and in which his partner still lived.
The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against that Order, finding that the County Court had reviewed all the evidence and reached a decision that contained no error of law.
Leeds CC v Fawcett [2008] EWCA Civ, [2008] All ER (D) 39 (May)
Following complaints of antisocial behaviour by the defendant, comprising insults, abuse and threats directed against his neighbours, a judge granted an Antisocial Behaviour Injunction with a power of arrest. The defendant's immediate response was to swear at and insult one neighbour (threatening to kill her) and to throw a brick at the house of another.
On a committal application, the defendant was initially remanded in custody but released on bail two weeks later when the injunction was enlarged to exclude him from part of an estate on which he had lived with his partner.
Three weeks later he was found inside the exclusion zone. The judge committed him to prison for 3 months.
The Court of Appeal upheld that sentence but reduced it by the short period for which the defendant had been remanded in custody.
Kirklees Council v Davis [2008] EWCA Civ, [2008] All ER (D) 289 (May)
A Magistrates' Court made the maximum 3 month Closure Order in exercise of the 'crack house closure' powers in the Antisocial Behaviour Act 2003. The claimant, who was a tolerated trespasser, had to move out. The Order was effective and nuisance ceased.
Just before the Order expired, and the claimant was due to move back in, a Magistrates' Court granted an extension for a further 3 months.
On appeal, the Crown Court upheld that Order and the claimant sought Judicial Review. Dismissing his claim, the Divisional Court gave guidance on the correct approach to granting and extending Closure Orders.
R(Smith) v Snaresbrook Crown Court [2008] EWHC 1282 Admin, [2008] All ER (D) 98 (Jun)
In June 2007, the Council obtained an Antisocial Behaviour Injunction, preventing the defendant from using or threatening violence against neighbours, or acting in a manner capable of causing nuisance to neighbours or their visitors.
The Council alleged that, in breach of the Injunction, the defendant had in November 2007 driven his van at a neighbour (who had had to jump clear) and had made a false allegation of incorrect parking against a neighbour's visitor.
The judge found both matters proved, although he accepted that the defendant had not meant to hurt the neighbour (at whom he had driven) but rather to frighten him. He imposed a sentence of four months imprisonment.
The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal, ruling that although the sentence was at the top end of the available sentences, it was not excessive.
Birmingham CC v Flatt [2008] EWCA Civ [2008] All ER (D) 145 (Jun)
Ms Gilboy had been a secure tenant. A judge granted a Demotion Order in the light of her household's antisocial behaviour. The Council then received more complaints and gave Notice of Intention to Seek Possession of her home, under the mandatory procedure for possession available against demoted tenants.
Ms Gilboy disputed the fresh allegations but, on review, a reviewing officer found that her household had been responsible for some of the further nuisance as alleged.
Ms Gilroy sought Judicial Review of the decision to bring proceedings, on the basis that the reviewing officer, who had resolved the factual issues against her, was not an "independent" tribunal as required by Human Rights Act 1998 Schedule 1 Article 6.
That claim was rejected by the judge and the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal. The demoted tenancy regime was not materially different from the introductory tenancy regime in respect of which the Court of Appeal had already found that the combination of a right to an internal review and possible scrutiny by judicial review was sufficient for Article 6 purposes.
R(Gilboy) v Liverpool City Council [2008] EWCA 751

Section: Antisocial Behaviour

Case Law Update

Legal Update

Reporting on May-Jul 2008

Quick Links

Welcome to the Legal Update

Archive Issues Reporting Periods