Greenwich London Borough Council v Powell
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Bridge of Harwich,Lord Templeman,Lord Griffiths,Lord Ackner,Lord Lowry |
| Judgment Date | 08 December 1988 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1988] UKHL J1208-2 |
| Date | 08 December 1988 |
| Court | House of Lords |
[1988] UKHL J1208-2
Lord Bridge of Harwich
Lord Templeman
Lord Griffiths
Lord Ackner
Lord Lowry
House of Lords
My Lords,
The appellants are the local authority for the London Borough of Greenwich. I shall refer to them as "the council." The respondents are Mr. and Mrs. Powell. I shall refer to them as "the Powells." The council own a caravan site known as the Thistlebrook Caravan Site at Abbey Wood, S.E.2. The Powells occupy part of the site known as pad Jl, on which they are permitted to station two caravans pursuant to the terms of an agreement with the council. In October 1986 the council gave the Powells four weeks' notice to quit and in November 1986 they instituted proceedings for possession. The Powells pleaded in defence that the Thistlebrook site was a "protected site" as defined by section 5(1) of the Mobile Homes Act 1983. An agreement under which a person is entitled to station a caravan on a protected site and to occupy it as his only or main residence may only be terminated as provided by Schedule 1 to the Act of 1983. The Powells' agreement has never been so terminated and there is no dispute that they occupy the caravans as their only or main residence. Hence the only issue in the case is whether the Thistlebrook site is a "protected site" as defined by section 5(1). On 3 November 1987 Judge James at the Woolwich County Court held that it was not and made an order for possession. On 23 February 1988 the Court of Appeal (Purchas L.J. and Heilbron J.) held that it was and allowed the Powells' appeal. The council now appeal by leave of your Lordships' House.
The issue raised is one of great importance for local authorities. It can only be understood in the context of the historical development of the legislation governing caravan sites.
In the 1950s the mushrooming of residential caravan sites to alleviate the acute shortage of conventional housing presented many problems to local planning authorities which their powers under the Town and Country Planning Acts were inadequate to resolve. The first direct statutory control over caravan sites as such was imposed by the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960. This established a system of licensing of caravan sites by local authorities which gave effective control over both the establishment of new sites and the conditions under which sites were required to be operated. Section 24 of the Act gave power to local authorities themselves to provide both residential and holiday sites within their areas and to acquire land compulsorily for the purpose. Sites provided by local authorities, since they were themselves the licensing authorities, were not required to be licensed: paragraph 11 of Schedule 1.
Part I of the Caravan Sites Act 1968 introduced for the first time a very limited form of statutory security of tenure for the occupier of a residential caravan on a "protected site" as defined by section 1(2), either as licensee of a pitch on which to station his own caravan or as occupier of a caravan belonging to the site owner. In each case his contractual right could only be determined by four weeks' notice and he could only be evicted by court order. The court was given power to suspend enforcement of an eviction order "for such period not exceeding 12 months from the date of the order as the court thinks reasonable" and from time to time to extend the period of suspension for not more than 12 months at a time: section 4. This limited protection I shall refer to as "the 1968 security of tenure." A "protected site" is defined by section 1(2) which provides:
"For the purposes of this Part of this Act a protected site is any land in respect of which a site licence is required under Part I of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 or would be so required if paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 to that Act (exemption of land occupied by local authorities) were omitted, not being land in respect of which the relevant planning permission or site licence –(a) is expressed to be granted for holiday use only; or (b) is otherwise so expressed or subject to such conditions that there are times of the year when no caravan may be stationed on the land for human habitation."
The effect of this definition is that the 1968 security of tenure is available to all occupiers of residential caravans on local authority sites as well as on privately owned sites.
Part II of the Act of 1968, which came into force on 1 April 1970, attempted to resolve the problem of providing orderly caravan sites to accommodate the gipsy community and of controlling unauthorised gipsy encampments. By definition in section 16:
'"gipsies' means persons of nomadic habit of life, whatever their race or origin, but does not include members of an organised group of travelling showmen, or of persons engaged in travelling circuses, travelling together as such."
Section 6 imposes a duty on local authorities
"to exercise their powers under section 24 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (provision of caravan sites) so far as may be necessary to provide adequate accommodation for gipsies residing in or resorting to their area."
Sections 10 to 12 impose a system of control of the unauthorised stationing of gipsies' caravans in the area of any local authority which is dependent on the designation of that area by the Minister under section 12 as an area to which section 10 applies. The condition to justify designation under section 12 is that it must appear to the Minister
"either that adequate provision is made in the area for the accomodation of gipsies residing in or resorting to the area, or that in all the circumstances it is not necessary or expedient to make any such provision." (subsection (3))
Within a designated area it is an offence under section 10 for a gipsy to station a caravan on land within the boundaries of a highway, on other unoccupied land or on occupied land without the consent of the occupier. Section 11 provides machinery for the expeditious removal by order of a magistrates' court of unauthorised gipsy caravans stationed in a designated area.
The policy underlying Part II of the Act of 1968 is, if I may say so, admirably described by Ralph Gibson L.J. in West Glamorgan County Council v. Rafferty [1987] 1 W.L.R. 457, 463:
"First, adequate accommodation is to be provided for gipsies in the area of the local authority in the interest of the gipsies themselves - giving them sites to which they can lawfully go and which will be supplied with facilities and supervised so that the sites will be maintained in decent order. Given some security of accommodation their children are more likely to get effective instruction in school. Any gipsies not complying with the regulations of the site may be ejected. Such sites will be better both for the travelling people who use them and for those who live near the sites. The second purpose of the legislation is plain from sections 10 and 12 of the Act of 1968."
Ralph Gibson L.J. then summarises the effect of sections 10 to 12 and continues:
"The rest of the community is thus to an extent protected from visitation by gipsies trespassing on land, and camping on unregulated sites so as to cause nuisance, and sometimes damage, to those areas in which they trespass and the people living there."
The Mobile Homes Act 1975 gave greatly enhanced security of tenure to a person stationing his own caravan on a licensed caravan site for occupation as his only or main residence. The detailed provisions are elaborate and have now been superseded. It is sufficient, therefore, to say that, in substance, they gave the occupier statutory security of tenure for five years, renewable for a further three years. This I will call "the 1975 security of tenure." The Act of 1975, however, by its own definition of "protected site," which I need not set out, deliberately excluded from the benefit of the 1975 security of tenure occupiers of caravans on all local authority sites.
The Mobile Homes Act 1983 replaced the main provisions of the Act of 1975 and still further enhanced the security of tenure enjoyed by a person stationing his own caravan on an authorised site for occupation as his only or main residence. Subject to exceptions which are immaterial for present purposes, this security ("the 1983 security of tenure") in substance continues indefinitely and is transmissible by sale or gift of the caravan. The occupier cannot be evicted except by court order which may only be made on the grounds, put shortly: (1) that the occupier is in breach of agreement and that it is reasonable for the agreement to be terminated; (2) that the occupier is not occupying the caravan as his only or main residence; (3) that the condition of the caravan is detrimental to the amenity of the site (Sch. 1, Pt. I, Paras. 4,5,6). For present purposes, the all-important change effected by the Act of 1983, as compared with the Act of 1975, is to extend the 1983 security of tenure to caravans stationed on all local authority sites except gipsy sites. This change is effected by the definition in section 5(1) of the Act of 1983 which reads:
"'protected site' does not include any land occupied by a local authority as a caravan site providing accommodation for gipsies … but, subject to that, has the same meaning as in Part I of the Caravan Sites Act 1968."
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Doherty et al. v. Birmingham City Council, [2008] N.R. Uned. 266 (HL)
...unsuccessfully, in Connors: see 40 EHRR 189, paras. 43-46 (summarizing the statutory provisions and referring to Greenwich LBC v. Powell [1989] A.C. 995, 1012); paras. 77-80 (the government's submissions); and paras. 81-95 (the Court's assessment). It would be disingenuous to say ......
-
Doherty and Others v Birmingham City Council
...statutory scheme equally by means of exclusion or by inclusion. In Connors (para 44) the Strasbourg court itself referred to Greenwich LBC v Powell (2005) 21 HLR 218, where the House of Lords had referred to the clear "intention of the legislature" shown by the 1983 Act to exclude local aut......
-
R v South Hams District Council, ex parte Gibb ; R v Gloucestershire County Council, ex parte Davies ; R v Warwickshire County Council, ex parte Walker
...see the judgment of Laws J. in the Dorset case at p.8. 37 I should refer also to the speech of Lord Bridge in Greenwich LBC v. Powell [1989] AC 995. In that case the defendants had their permanent residence at a caravan site provided by Greenwich LBC pursuant to its duty under section 6 of ......
-
Doherty and Others v Birmingham City Council
...strenuously but unsuccessfully, in Connors: see 40 EHRR 189, paras 43-46 (summarizing the statutory provisions and referring to Greenwich LBC v Powell [1989] AC 995, 1012); paras 77-80 (the government's submissions); and paras 81-95 (the Court's assessment). It would be disingenuous to say......
-
Gypsies and Travellers in the United Kingdom: Planning, Housing and Human Rights in a Changing Legal Regulatory Framework
...ts way into the stat utory defin ition of the Caravan Site s Act 18 Simpson & Weiner (eds) Th e Oxford English Dicti onary 2 ed (1989)19 [1989] 2 WLR 7 (HL), [1989] JPL 513GYPSIES AND TRAVELLERS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM 537 © Juta and Company (Pty) Thus the word “gypsy” has become a convenient......