R MARY-JO Joyce v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and The Regions and ST ALBANS City and District Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MR JUSTICE MAURICE KAY |
| Judgment Date | 17 October 2002 |
| Neutral Citation | [2002] EWHC 2213 (Admin) |
| Docket Number | CO/4068/2001 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Date | 17 October 2002 |
[2002] EWHC 2213 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Mr Justice Maurice Kay
CO/4068/2001
THE APPLICANT APPEARED IN PERSON
MR D FORSDICK (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor, Queen Anne's Chambers, 28 Broadway, London SW1H 9JS) appeared on behalf of the FIRST DEFENDANT
MR J SWIRSKY (instructed by Legal & Democratic Services, St Albans City & District Council, St Peter's Street, St Albans, Herts AL1 3JE) appeared on behalf of the SECOND DEFENDANT
Thursday, 17 October 2002
Miss Joyce is the owner of a house at 20 Marlborough Road, St Albans, which she purchased in 1981. It is a mid-terrace house in a conservation area. She describes its present condition as derelict, and it is common ground that it is unfit for human habitation within the meaning of section 604 of the Housing Act 1985 (as amended).
On 11th April 2000 the local housing authority, St Albans City and District Council, made a Compulsory Purchase Order pursuant to section 17 of the Housing Act 1985 and the Acquisition of Land Act 1981. That brought into play the statutory procedures under the 1981 Act. In due course an Inspector was appointed by the Secretary of State, and a public inquiry began on 5th December 2000. It lasted for some 12 days. On 18th May 2001 the Inspector reported. His report runs to some 44 pages plus various appendices. He recommended confirmation of the order. On 20th August 2001 the Secretary of State confirmed the order. The decision letter includes this paragraph:
"The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that there is a compelling case in the public interest that justifies the compulsory acquisition of the order property from the resident owner occupier. A considerable amount of work would be needed to renovate the property and its sale on the open market would be likely to achieve a qualitative housing gain. In its present condition it could not be used as part of the general housing stock and refurbishment would effectively bring the property back into housing use, resulting in a quantitative gain. He has accordingly decided to confirm the order without modification."
There is now before the Court a statutory application under section 23(1) and (2) of the Acquisition of Land Act, in which Miss Joyce seeks to question the validity of the Compulsory Purchase Order. Miss Joyce has presented her own case, as indeed she did at the inquiry. I say it once that she has done so in a manner which has been intelligent, articulate and tenacious.
The statutory power under which the local housing authority and the Secretary of State acted is to be found in section 17 of the Housing Act 1985, the material parts of which read as follows:
"(1) A local housing authority may for the purposes of this Part…
(b) acquire houses, or buildings which may be made suitable as houses, together with any land occupied with the houses or buildings."
The reference to "the purposes of this Part" is a reference to the purposes of Part II of the 1985 Act.
Part II is headed "Provision of Housing Accommodation". Section 8(1) provides:
"Every local housing authority shall consider housing conditions in their district and the needs of the district with respect to the provision of further housing accommodation."
The provision of housing accommodation is further dealt with in section 9, which provides:
"(1) A local housing authority may provide housing accommodation —
(a) by erecting houses, or converting buildings into houses…or
(b) by acquiring houses…
(3) These powers may equally be exercised in relation to land acquired for the purpose —
(a) of disposing of houses provided…on the land, or
(b) of disposing of the land to a person who intends to provide housing accommodation on it."
In addition to the provisions of the Act, there exists Circular 5/93, entitled "Compulsory Purchase Orders Made Under Housing Powers", and dated 19th February 1993. That document states that it provides comprehensive guidance to local authorities considering whether to make Compulsory Purchase Orders under the Housing Acts. Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Circular are in these terms:
"(4) Section 17 of the 1985 Act empowers local housing authorities to acquire land, houses or other properties for the provision of housing accommodation. Acquisition must achieve a quantitative or qualitative housing gain.
(5) The main uses of this power have been to assemble land for housing and ancillary development, including the provision of access roads; to bring empty properties into housing use; and to improve sub-standard or defective properties. Current practice is for authorities acquiring land or property compulsorily to dispose of it to the private sector, Housing Associations or owner occupiers."
Under the heading "Acquisition of Sub-standard Properties", paragraph 11 provides:
"Compulsory purchase of sub-standard properties may also be justified as last resort in cases where a clear housing gain will be obtained; the owner of the property has failed to maintain it or bring it to an acceptable standard; and other statutory measures, such as the service of statutory notices, have not achieved the authority's objective of securing the provision of acceptable housing accommodation. In considering whether to confirm a compulsory purchase order the Secretary of State will wish to know what are the alleged defects in the order property; what other measures the authority has taken to remedy matters; the outcome; and the extent and nature of any works carried out by the owner to secure the improvement and repair of the property. The Secretary of State will also wish to know the authority's proposals regarding any tenants of the property."
That then is the statutory framework and the guidance which has been issued in relation to it. The Compulsory Purchase Order had annexed to it a statutory statement of reasons, and it is appropriate that I quote from the document to the extent that it describes the purpose of seeking to acquire the property. It states:
"The Council's intention in seeking to acquire the land is that the property should be made fit for human habitation, the abatement of the statutory nuisances caused by the property and the bringing back into use of the land for housing purposes. The Council's intention is that this will also achieve housing gain. The owner occupier of the land has consistently failed to maintain the property despite offers of renovation grant assistance dating back to 1981. Statutory disrepair notices were served in 1993 but no works were undertaken. A home renovation grant was approved in March 1998 and time for grant works to be completed extended from 12 to 17 months. No works whatsoever have been undertaken and the grant has now lapsed.
"As well as being unfit for human habitation the condition of the property is causing a statutory nuisance to adjoining properties by reason of penetrating dampness and pigeon infestation. Both of these matters are the subject of formal complaints from affected landowners and have resulted in service of abatement notices by the Council. The Council is under a mandatory duty to secure the abatement of these nuisances. As part of its strategy for the improvement and effective use of private sector housing it is the Council's policy to seek the improvement of substandard residential accommodation. This policy is secured as far as possible by encouraging owners to voluntarily improve properties in substandard condition and/or the service of statutory notices. Compulsory purchase is seen as a last resort in order to make the property fit and abate the nuisances."
I turn next to the conclusions of the Inspector, and it is necessary that I quote from his report. He stated at paragraph 154 to 156:
"The order property is a mid-terrace house in an area of mixed uses where there is significant residential presence. The neighbouring properties are sound and well-maintained. The roof is in a very poor state with many slipped or missing slates. Guttering and downpipes are broken or missing. Water penetration has resulted in extensive damage to ceilings, walls and floors, particularly on the upper floor where there is considerable evidence of past occupation by pigeons. There is rising damp in the basement and damp in the walls around some windows. There may also be beetle infestation and wet and dry rot in timber. All windows are damaged in one way or another and some cannot be closed. However, there is no evidence of structural instability. The rear basement room contains a sink, cooker and food storage facilities. There is a supply of cold water but no hot water. There is a gas supply but no electricity. The bath and toilet do not appear to be usable. The defects in the house directly affect the adjoining properties, and its condition has a deleterious effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.
"Refurbishment as a single dwelling would not require planning permission and need not affect the character and appearance of the building or the conservation area adversely providing that there are no significant external alterations….
"The house is unfit for human habitation in its present state and although Ms Joyce continues to live there it is in conditions that would be unacceptable to most people. A considerable amount of work would be needed, but in my opinion it could be renovated...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- R MARY-JO Joyce v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and The Regions and ST ALBANS City and District Council
-
Charles James Braithwaite v The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government London Borough of Enfield (Interested Party)
...with a view to improving them as housing accommodation. Joyce v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions [2002] EWHC 2213 (Admin) at paras 18–20. 4 Ministerial Guidance has been given in relation to compulsory purchase orders, CPOs, in the form of a Circular from t......