R (Weaver) v London & Quadrant Housing Trust
[2009] EWCA Civ 587
Independent editorial summary — not the official judgment. Read the full judgment via the source link.
Ratio Decidendi
A registered social landlord whose allocation and management of social housing stock, including decisions to terminate a tenancy, is closely bound up with a statutory public regulatory framework is exercising a function of a public nature and is a hybrid public authority under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 for those functions, even though its powers derive from an ordinary tenancy contract.
Facts
Mrs Susan Weaver was an assured tenant of the London & Quadrant Housing Trust, a registered social landlord providing below-market social housing and registered under the Housing Act 1996. After falling more than eight weeks into rent arrears she was served with a notice seeking possession under the mandatory ground 8 of the Housing Act 1988. She sought judicial review, arguing that the Trust had acted contrary to a legitimate expectation arising from Housing Corporation guidance and that seeking possession by this route breached her rights under Article 8 of the European Convention, on the basis that the Trust was exercising a public function for the purposes of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Judgment Summary
The Court of Appeal held that, although the Trust's decision to seek possession arose from an ordinary tenancy contract, the allocation and management of its social housing stock was so bound up with the statutory and regulatory framework administered by the Housing Corporation, and so closely comparable to a local authority's provision of housing, that it amounted to a function of a public nature. The Trust was therefore a hybrid public authority under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 for that purpose, even though Mrs Weaver's own claims based on legitimate expectation and Article 8 ultimately failed on the facts of her case.
Key Quotes
"the management and allocation of housing stock by the defendant (including decisions concerning the termination of a tenancy) is a function of a public nature, with the effect that the defendant is to be regarded as a public authority in that respect for the purposes of the Human Rights Act 1998, section 6(3)(b)"
— Divisional Court declaration, quoted by Elias LJ at [6](verbatim, verified against the judgment)
Subsequent Treatment
Followed in subsequent cases on hybrid public authority status.
What To Do Next
Get Professional Help