Carly Jayne Willott, R (on the application of) v Eastbourne Borough Council
| Court | King's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Judge | Mrs Justice Ellenbogen |
| Neutral Citation | [2024] EWHC 113 (Admin) |
| Date | 25 January 2024 |
| Year | 2024 |
| Counsel | Nick Bano,Clare Cullen |
Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EWHC 113 (Admin)
Case No: CO/1423/2022; AC-2022-LON-000424
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
KING'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Date: 25/01/2024
Before :
MRS JUSTICE ELLENBOGEN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between :
The King (on the application of Carly Jayne Willott) Claimant
- and -
Eastbourne Borough Council Defendant
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Nick Bano (instructed by BHT Sussex) for the Claimant
Clare Cullen (instructed by Knights PLC) for the Defendant
Hearing dates: 21 and 24 February 2023
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
APPROVED JUDGMENT
This judgment was handed down remotely at 2pm on 25 January 2024 by circulation to the
parties or their representatives by e-mail and by release to the National Archives.
.............................
MRS JUSTICE ELLENBOGEN DBE
Judgment Approved by the court for handing down R(Willott) v Eastbourne Borough Council
Mrs Justice Ellenbogen DBE :
1. This judgment follows the full hearing of the Claimant’s application for judicial
review of the Defendant’s decision, on review, dated 4 January 2022, by which it
upheld its original decision, made on 9 February 2021, that the Claimant ‘does not
qualify to join the housing register due to the ‘serious anti-social behaviour’ at her
tenancy [address supplied]’. The challenge is advanced on six grounds, but, broadly
put, on two alternative footings. The first is a challenge to the lawfulness of a rule
which is said to disqualify applicants who have a poor history of anti-social
behaviour, including those who are disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act
2010 (‘the EqA’), from joining the social housing waiting list. Should that challenge
fail, the Claimant challenges the lawfulness of the Defendant’s application of the rule
in her case. The challenge comes about in the following circumstances.
2. With effect from 14 December 2015, the Claimant and her family occupied a house in
Royal Sussex Crescent, Eastbourne, initially under an introductory tenancy and,
subsequently under a secure tenancy within the meaning of section 79 of the Housing
Act 1985 (‘the HA 1985’). An initial allegation of anti-social behaviour was made on
13 June 2016. A further complaint was made on 14 June 2018, following which the
Defendant sent the Claimant a letter enclosing an acceptable behaviour contract.
Notice seeking possession was served on 7 June 2019 and a claim for possession was
issued on 17 July 2019. On 9 January 2020, the Defendant issued a claim for an
injunction in respect of dogs at the property and a final injunction was granted on 28
September 2020, requiring that identified dogs be controlled, and be removed from
the house should they bark for longer than 10 minutes. The order did not prevent the
Claimant from keeping dogs.
3. On 27 January 2020, Ms Kim Barnes, a senior caseworker employed by the
Defendant, made a safeguarding referral, stating that she had concerns about the
Claimant’s mental health. On 10 March 2020, Professor Fox, a professor of clinical
psychiatry, completed a report on the Claimant, the key part of which read as follows:
Opinion
4.1 [The Claimant] is a 29 year old lady who is subject to a housing
possession order and also in July 2019 her children were taken
into care. Allegations have been made about her behaviour with
neighbours and other antisocial behaviours. She has a history of
disruptive behaviour going back to her childhood.
4.2 She has been diagnosed as having Adult ADHD and an autistic
spectrum condition with which I concur.
4.3 Other diagnoses include Mixed Anxiety and Depressive Disorder
(ICD-10 Code F41.2) and also Mild Alcohol Dependence (ICD-
10 F10.2).
4.4 Her prognosis is somewhat guarded as Adult ADHD is a chronic
condition. From the SWIFT reports and parallel case of child and
Judgment Approved by the court for handing down R(Willott) v Eastbourne Borough Council
family proceedings it has been assessed as severe, chronic and
enduring.
4.5 With regard to alcohol, she has engaged with STAR in the last
month and she does need to minimise her alcohol intake and also
not use alcohol to cope with anxiety and some symptoms of
autism. She needs to learn this. She has been offered
rehabilitation but is yet to take this up. Until this is the case her
prognosis will remain guarded.
4.6 With regard to mixed anxiety and depression, I believe that once
she has managed to get on top of her alcohol difficulties and get
through the childcare proceedings and her housing issues sorted
out then it is likely her mood will improve.
4.7 She appears to have had difficulties with autism and ADHD for
most of her life. Anxiety and depressive symptoms have occurred
more recently with the difficulties she has been having and
alcohol again is relatively recent in the last few years.
4.8 I believe she is disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act
2010. This relates to her ADHD and autistic spectrum condition
because her difficulties have been present for more than a year
and they are of a severe nature. They are also enduring.
4.9 There is treatment that could be suggested from a psychological
perspective to assist her once she has managed to minimise her
alcohol intake and she could benefit from a course of CBT
looking at self-esteem and some of her emotional control issues;
perhaps 6 to 12 sessions of treatment would be my initial
recommendation and then further sessions as required.
Professor Fox did not (and had not been asked to) address whether the conduct of
which complaint had been made, and which had led to the possession proceedings,
had arisen in consequence of the disabilities which he had identified.
4. On numerous occasions, the Police had attended at the Claimant’s property. Towards
the end of March 2020, she had left the property, following complaints of anti-social
behaviour. On 1 April 2020, the Police attended again, following reports of concerns
about her safety on her return. Those had related to the behaviour of her former
partner, Mr Walters, who has since died. The Police found Mr Walters at the house
and he was served with a domestic violence protection order on 3 April 2020, the
conditions of which banned him from contacting the Claimant, directly or indirectly.
Nevertheless, Mr Walters was found by Police at the Claimant’s house on 11 April
2020, and arrested, after a forced entry. On 1 May 2020, he and the Claimant were
arrested at the property, she for affray and he for assault. Mr Walters was arrested at
the property, once again, on 8 May 2020, for assaulting the Claimant. Bail conditions
were set to prevent him from entering Eastbourne, or contacting the Claimant before
26 June 2020.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
