D complained that G had been guilty of more than 100 incidents of verbal and physical intimidation spanning 12 years. During that time G was criminally prosecuted seven times and caused 64 police call-outs.
In April 2003, G was sentenced to three years imprisonment for unrelated offences.
D reported this to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and asked it to evict Mrs G (the tenant). It decided not to do so for reasons that included serious risk to the safety of its own staff. It offered to rehouse D in any area of his choice.
D claimed the failure to tackle the antisocial behaviour infringed his human rights to respect for his home and personal property.
The judge dismissed his claim but the Court of Appeal has upheld it. The court decided the NIHE decision not to take a possession case or other action against G infringed D's human rights, unless the executive could show it had carefully considered and struck the right balance between protecting D and taking action against G.
The evidence before the court did not reveal what advice the police had given, nor what protection would have been available if possession was sought, nor the extent of the risks to NIHE staff. The court could not be satisfied that NIHE had taken reasonable and appropriate measures necessary to protect D's rights.
Source
Housing Today
Reference
Every social landlord declining to act on substantiated complaints of antisocial behaviour by a tenant must now be in a position to show it has undertaken a well documented balancing exercise justifying its inaction.
