In October 1980 – 40 years ago!! - I started work at the
Vauxhall Law Centre, just off Scotland Road in Liverpool. It was to be a life
changing experience. In fact, it was a life changing weekend as my eldest son,
now a Solicitor, was born the day before! So, what better time to post something
about a case from the early days, that highlights what Law Centres have done
for us?! This the case of Liverpool City Council v Irwin [1977] AC 237, that just
predated my time at Vauxhall. It was a disrepair case that went all the way to
the House of Lords (Supreme Court for most modern lawyers!).
The tenants lived in a property that was officially called
Haigh Heights near the City Centre. It was part of a group of three known to
everyone as the Piggeries. They lived up to their name. A particular problem
related to ‘common parts’. They were 14 stories high. The lifts were regularly
breaking down. The stairs were in a state of disrepair. There were rubbish
chutes that were often blocked. They were a mess.
Early in the 1970s the tenants embarked on a rent strike.
Liverpool City Council issued possession proceedings. The case was taken up by
the Vauxhall Law Centre that had opened in 1973 as a joint venture between
Liverpool Law Society and Liverpool City Council. The possession claim was defended,
and a counterclaim was issued alleging, among other things, that Council were
in breach of a covenant to maintain the ‘common parts’. There was no such
statutory implied covenant at that time.
At first instance HHJ Cunliffe found in favour of the
tenants. The Court of Appeal reversed this and found for the council. Lord
Denning dissenting said that there was indeed an implied term that the council
would take reasonable care maintain the common parts. But he found that there
was no breach on the facts.
And so to the House of Lords, which firmly agreed that there
was indeed an implied term. Lord Wilberforce agreed with Denning that
functioning lifts and stairways were essential to the premises without which
life was effectively impossible. One highlight was the comment by Lord Salmon
on an argument that had been put forward on behalf of the council –
“It has been argued that the council should
not be taken to have accepted
any legal obligations of any kind. After all, this was a distinguished city
council which expected its tenants happily to rely on it to treat them reason-
ably without having the temerity to expect the council to undertake any legal
obligations to do so. I confess that I find this argument and similar arguments
which I have often heard advanced on behalf of other organisations singularly
unconvincing.”
And so, an implied term to take reasonable care of these common parts was established. From the end of the 1980s this duty has been implied by statute.
I mention
this as one example of how housing law was developed by a Law Centre taking up
an issue that affected a whole community. Law Centres have fought for the
rights of those in need. They have also played a key role in changing difficult
areas of law. They need our support. They and other agencies need us to Go the
Extra Mile - https://atjf.org.uk/go-the-extra-mile-for-justice
Informative post. Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteBest Housing Disrepair Solicitors