On 22 May 2012 Arthur Moore and Andy Lane co-tutored a seminar on “The Article 8 Defence and its impact on private landlords’ possession actions” following their own experiences of opposing Article 8 defences in private landlords’ possession claims.
On 18 July 2012 Her Honour Judge Karen Walden-Smith, sitting at Central London County Court in Malik v (1) Persons Unknown (2) Reynolds (3) Matthews, despite finding that Article 8 was engaged, ordered possession against “Grow Heathrow”, a squatter community garden & housing project occupying land on the proposed third Heathrow runway site.
Permission to appeal was granted and though there is an interesting point as to whether Article 8 is engaged at all the practical reality is that, save where there are exceptional circumstances, any eviction is likely to be proportionate. The concern is – and both Arthur and Andy have had these cases (with Alex Bastin also presently instructed in a possession claim facing a private landlord Article 8 defence) – that it may encourage more such defences which, if the court is not robust enough or sufficiently attuned to recent jurisprudence, will not be dealt with summarily.
This content is provided free of charge for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. No responsibility for the accuracy and/or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted by any member of Chambers or by Chambers as a whole.
Please note that we do not give legal advice on individual cases which may relate to this content other than by way of formal instruction of a member of Hardwicke. However if you have any other queries about this content please contact: