Disabled tenants in private or social housing have greater protection from eviction following a Supreme Court decision.
The Justices unanimously held that a court must give detailed consideration to a challenge to a landlord’s claim for possession where it is brought by a disabled tenant under the Equality Act 2010, in Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities.
According to Shelter, which acted for the tenant, “This judgment is likely to help disabled tenants in private or social housing, who are threatened with eviction where they have limited security, have no other defences, and the reason they are being evicted is linked to their disability.”
The case concerned a tenant given temporary accommodation by the council in 2010 after he was found to be homeless. When he refused alternative accommodation, however, the council brought a claim for repossession.
The tenant claimed he was being treated unfavourably because his serious mental health problems affected his ability to move home. He claimed his eviction was not “necessary” or “proportionate”, as required by the Equality Act, because the housing association could have let him stay and offered the alternative accommodation to someone else.
The Supreme Court set out a four-part test for judges to consider: the landlord’s aims in seeking to evict; whether there is a rational link between that aim and the proposed eviction; whether the eviction is no more than is necessary to achieve that aim; and whether a fair balance is struck between the aim and the disadvantage caused to the disabled tenant.
Michelle Crabbe, the Shelter Bristol solicitor involved in the case, said the judgment represented “a major step towards ensuring that the rights of disabled tenants under the Equality Act to protection from unjustified eviction are properly considered by the courts”.
