These relationships broke down. Each of the women left and gave valid notices to quit to the councils. The tenancies ended and the councils brought claims for possession against the men.
In two of the cases the local judges refused possession because the councils could not properly justify evicting the men in view of the right to "respect for a home" in the 1998 Human Rights Act, Schedule 1, Article 8. The councils appealed. In the third case, possession was granted and the man appealed.
On appeal all the men contended that, despite the recent decision of the House of Lords in Qazi v Harrow LBC, they could rely on their human rights to defeat the possession claims.
The Court of Appeal found for the authorities. In view of the Qazi decision, article 8 could provide no defence to a possession claim for a person without a legal right to occupy. None of the councils' actions had been subject to claims for judicial review. The cases did not raise issues so "wholly exceptional" as to justify denying possession.
Source
Housing Today
Reference
These decisions clear any remaining obstacles article 8 may have posed in claiming possession from non-tenants, unless and until the House of Lords reconsiders its view on appeals from these cases, or the Strasbourg court allows Mr Qazi's appeal.
