R (on the application of SO) v Thanet DC [2023] EWCA Civ 298; [2023] 1 WLR 3462: Successful judicial review in Court of Appeal concerning a novel point of law concerning the rights of Gypsies & Travellers given permission to camp on local authority land and challenging the use of s 77 Criminal Justice Act 1994 to evict prior to a lawful notice of withdrawal of permission to occupy land.
R (on the application of SO) v Thanet DC (Costs) [2023] EWCA Civ 526: Seminal reported costs decision arising identifying the approach to determination of liability and interim costs orders in successful Court of Appeal cases, setting aside lower court’s judgment.
Dassy Jones v (1) Welsh Ministers; (2) Rhondda Cynon Taff County BC (Administrative Court (Planning (Wales)) CO/2809/2023: Successful statutory appeal where the rights of the Traveller’s children were not lawfully balanced against highway safety issues in planning enforcement proceedings. Led to a grant of planning permission on remission.
Brentwood Borough Council v Paul Buckley and others including Charlie Ward (by his litigation Friend Lucy Ward) QB 2021 -002871 High Court 28 June 2024 before HHJ Wood KC: Successful challenge to enforcement of a planning injunction leading to grant of planning permission.
The County of Herefordshire DC v Zachary Biddle & D Mellings K00WR364; The County of Herefordshire DC v Valerie Butler Claim No:K00WR363: Worcester County Court five-day trial before HHJ Salmon. Complex mobile homes act possession proceedings raising disability issues. Led to mid-trial settlement.
Mulvenna and Smith v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (SSCLG) and the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) [2017] EWCA Civ 1850
Two judicial review claims followed Moore and Coates v SSCLG and EHRC [2015] EWHC 44 (Admin) in which Gilbart J found the Secretary of State had unlawfully discriminated against Romani Gypsies/Irish Travellers, by recovering all Gypsy/Traveller caravan site planning appeals for his own determination in breach of the Equality Act 2010 and Articles 8 and 14 of the ECHR. Claimants argued the Secretary of State’s unlawful recovery of their appeals had a ‘domino effect’ which rendered his own appeal decisions unlawful. The EHRC supported that argument, but Cranston J rejected it and the Court of Appeal upheld his decision.
Wetherspoons discriminated against Irish Travellers, 18 May 2015
High Court finds the Government discriminated against Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers, 21 January 2015
R (Mary Michelle Sheridan and Others) v Basildon BC [2011] EWHC 2938 (Admin)
The Irish Traveller residents of Dale Farm were unsuccessful in their judicial review challenge against the local authority’s decision to take direct action to evict them from their plots on the site. The case was heard at first instance by Ouseley J. Lord Justice Sullivan who refused a renewed application for permission made to the Court of Appeal.
Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs v Meier and others [2009] UKSC 11
Case concerning a claim for a wide possession order and supporting injunction brought against New Travellers encamped on woodland managed by the Forestry Commission. The Supreme Court held that an injunction, which restrained the Travellers from camping on the land they occupied and other parcels of land in the area, could stand but a wide possession order which covered land it owned, but not subject to unauthorised occupation when the order was made, should be discharged. In so doing, the Supreme Court also overturned Court of Appeal’s decision in this case and its decision in Drury v Secretary of State for the Environment [2004] EWCA Civ 200.
Leeds City Council v Price [2006] UKHL 10
House of Lords concluded that the eviction of Romani Gypsies & Irish Travellers from public land did not breach their human rights. Held that in a case with an inconsistency between a House of Lords judgment and ECtHR judgment, domestic courts were bound to follow House of Lords’ decision.
South Bucks DC v Porter (No.2) [2004] 1 WLR 1953
Second House of Lords case concerning the Porter family. Their Lordships upheld the decision to grant family planning permission and gave guidance to planning inspectors on the extent to which they needed to give reasons for their decisions.
R (Margaret Price) v Carmarthenshire CC [2003] EWHC 42 Admin
Court quashed a decision to evict an Irish Traveller from her land. She had made a homelessness application and the council had failed to consider whether she had a cultural aversion to bricks and mortar and, if so, whether there was any other suitable accommodation.
South Bucks DC v Porter (No.1) [2003] 2 AC 558
House of Lords decision that a court determining an application for an injunction to stop Romani Gypsies & Travellers living in caravans on their land, without planning permission, should take account of a variety of considerations, including personal circumstances and human rights of the defendants.
Clarke v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and Regions [2002] JPL 552
Court of Appeal held that when a Romani Gypsy sought planning permission for a caravan site and had a cultural aversion to bricks and mortar, it could breach his human rights to take account of an offer of conventional housing made to him.
Coster v United Kingdom [2001] 33 EHRR 20
One of four Gypsy cases heard together with Chapman v UK. ECtHR decided planning enforcement action did not breach human rights of Romani Gypsy families concerned, but that the State had a positive obligation to facilitate the Gypsy way of life.
R v Lincolnshire CC ex parte Atkinson (1995) 8 Admin LR 529
Concerned need for local authorities to take account of considerations of common humanity and carry out welfare enquiries before deciding to evict Romani Gypsies and Travellers from their land.
