The exercise of judicial discretion in rent arrears cases - Sheffield ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Decision-making axis Examination of the diverse influences illustrates the complex ways in which interactions depend in part on judges’ personal interpretations and values, which in turn informs the assessment of the credibility of evidence presented. The very complexity of the network of influences defies a simple explanation in which different factors could be ranked in terms of importance. It is however, possible to conceptualise the decision-making process in terms of a number of interrelated axes which represent a continuum of approaches. The continuum of approaches is characterised by on the one hand by legalism, a reliance on the framework of contract law and recognition of the role of the judiciary in debt management. In contrast the opposite end of the spectrum is characterised by pragmatism, a concern with social welfare issues and the primacy of the home. Where individuals place themselves within these continuums is informed by both macro and micro factors including personal attitudes and beliefs which in turn may be influenced by the amount of knowledge, experience and training received. Narrowing of discretion Another characteristic of decision-making which is given a very wide discretion is the need for the decision-maker to narrow this. We see this in the use of rules-of-thumb in both relation to levels of arrears (see Chapter 7) and also to the use of warrants for possession (see Chapter 8). The narrowing of discretion is also evident in the development of a relationship with claimants. While it is evident that judges do not simply slavishly follow the request of landlords, Chapter 6 illustrates how an out-of-the-ordinary request can be a trigger for a closer look than would normally be the case. Conclusions What this suggests is that there can be no “easy” way to achieving consistency between judges. Even where factors are consistently taken into account, this will not necessarily lead to the same outcome. The weight and effect of a particular factor will depend on how the judge approaches cases more generally and where s/he sits on the different axes we have identified. Chart 14, below seeks to represent the complexity of the decision-making process and to describe some of the specific categories of individual and structural factors that influence outcomes in possession hearings. 107
Thus it is likely that that even the introduction of some form of structured discretion which states that certain factors must be taken into account, e.g. level of arrears, personal circumstances of tenant, the impact on the landlord, will still lead to different outcomes for similar cases. Finally we would return to the importance of the decisions made in housing possession cases. Judges were acutely aware of this and for many the human element could not be ignored. This particularly impacted on decisions on application to suspend warrants for possession. The hardest thing is for judges to make the final decision to put people out of their homes. 108
Page 1 and 2:
The exercise of judicial discretion
Page 3 and 4:
The Research Unit, Department for C
Page 6 and 7:
Contents Executive summary i Chapte
Page 8 and 9:
Executive summary The research ques
Page 10 and 11:
the shift to housing officers appea
Page 12:
Conclusions A wide and diverse rang
Page 15 and 16:
on the role of judges under the exi
Page 17 and 18:
Northern 1 court hears over 1500 ho
Page 19 and 20:
significance to a particular respon
Page 21 and 22:
The application may be adjourned; t
Page 23 and 24:
such forms are completed in less th
Page 25 and 26:
In November 2001, the Legal Service
Page 27 and 28:
Levels of arrears Although the reas
Page 29 and 30:
Table 2: Rent levels from ODPM stat
Page 31 and 32:
Table 5: Changes in outcomes of ini
Page 33 and 34:
Table 6: Impact of participation on
Page 35 and 36:
The focus group participants consid
Page 37 and 38:
consideration in this chapter, the
Page 39 and 40:
Neither of the judges seemed to con
Page 41 and 42:
chambers, where the possession list
Page 43 and 44:
Most of the district judges felt th
Page 45 and 46:
The views of the claimants’ group
Page 47 and 48:
Qualitative and quantitative data f
Page 49 and 50:
anything to say, and wants to stay
Page 51 and 52:
Table 7: Sources of training and up
Page 53 and 54:
sought with what they know the judg
Page 55 and 56:
Chapter 5: Judges and landlords Int
Page 57 and 58:
Chart 7: Orders granted by requests
Page 59 and 60:
some unevenness in the impact of re
Page 61 and 62:
Thus it can be seen that the type o
Page 63 and 64:
District judges differed on how muc
Page 65 and 66:
There were three other, more genera
Page 67 and 68:
Conclusions In this chapter, we hav
Page 69 and 70: Chapter 6: Judges and tenants Intro
Page 71 and 72: approach he was more confident in t
Page 73 and 74: “I think in terms of exercising d
Page 75 and 76: Family make up The broad powers of
Page 77 and 78: are trying to deal with the particu
Page 79 and 80: “I wouldn’t dream of making an
Page 81 and 82: interpreter. Similarly, many of the
Page 83 and 84: Judges are human too - personal rea
Page 85 and 86: understand the proceedings, a great
Page 87 and 88: What must be emphasised is that whi
Page 89 and 90: also the most common explanation gi
Page 91 and 92: anomalous case of West Country cour
Page 93 and 94: District judges’ knowledge. Some
Page 95 and 96: Two of the judges interviewed felt
Page 97 and 98: DJ: I’d be inclining towards the
Page 99 and 100: how he dealt with the housing benef
Page 101 and 102: Chapter 8: Particular decisions: gr
Page 103 and 104: Table 10: Outcomes in Ground 8 case
Page 105 and 106: Others were, however, prepared to g
Page 107 and 108: It is perhaps not surprising that,
Page 109 and 110: the basis of the original possessio
Page 111 and 112: Chart 13: Impact of family make up
Page 113 and 114: The advice to the tenant was often
Page 115 and 116: Chapter 9: Conclusions Where the la
Page 117 and 118: shows that the vast majority of tho
Page 119: important determining factors is th
Page 123 and 124: 110
Page 125 and 126: Lawrence J (1995) “Sentencing pro
Page 127 and 128: give a typology of the characterist
Page 129 and 130: In analysing cases percentages have
Page 131 and 132: Appendix 2 - Research instruments 1
Page 133 and 134: What factors would you ascribe thos
Page 135 and 136: 20. Typically, how would you descri
Page 137 and 138: with a duty desk representative who
Page 139: DCA Research Series No. 6/05 The ex
show all

The exercise of judicial discretion in rent arrears cases - Sheffield ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?