Lindsay Johnson provides an update on the ongoing saga of public law defences to possession claims
The decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Kay v United Kingdom (App No 37341/06), delivered last month, is the latest contribution to the ongoing dialogue between the European and domestic courts as to the applicability and impact of Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) in possession claims.
It is not the last word and it does not resolve the conflict in domestic law as to exactly how Art 8 operates in possession proceedings. It does, however, provide interesting comment on the scope of conventional public law challenges and the degree of scrutiny to which administrative decisions to seek possession should be subjected.
To that extent, it is not only a decision which impacts on the narrow field of housing, but also contributes to the debate on the scope of judicial review remedies which includes: R (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] UKHL 26, [2001] 2 AC 532; R (Alconbury) v Secretary of
