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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 4: Consistency and difference Introduction In this chapter we examine the issues of consistency both between courts, and also between judges sitting in the same court. “Consistency” is taken to mean that cases with broadly similar features (primarily level of arrears, financial and other circumstances of the tenant) result in broadly similar outcomes, wherever the case was heard, and regardless of which district judge heard it. We also examine consistency in terms of approach, and whether differences in approach between judges may result in different outcomes. This chapter makes use of the information from the focus groups to establish the perceptions on this issue of key stakeholders: landlords, advice organisations, and solicitors. The quantitative data in respect of recorded cases has been analysed together with observations of the courts and their hearings to examine whether consistency does in fact appear to be achieved. Qualitative data from the interviews with district judges is used to suggest reasons why different outcomes may result from apparently similar cases. Perceptions of focus group participants Each of the focus groups started with an opening discussion of the participants’ experiences at the different courts they attended in their locality. These discussions invariably revealed perceived differences, in outcome, approach, and process, between different courts and between different judges. The focus group participants, both claimant and defendant representatives, in all three geographical areas, were concerned at this lack of consistency. Each of the focus groups was asked to consider which factors, in the opinion of the participants, most influenced judicial discretion. Both tenant representatives and participants who represented claimants were agreed that the following factors (without ascribing any priority) were those which most influenced discretion: housing benefit; the level of rent arrears; whether an agreement had been reached; attendance of the defendant; the nature of the tenant; and district judges’ familiarity with the claimant landlord’s representative. 21
The focus group participants considered that particular courts each had their own established culture. This more clearly emerged in smaller court where fewer judges sat. It was also influenced by the factors set out above. As a first step we sought to examine whether there were differences between the outcomes in the four courts which could be explained by differences between the cases coming to those courts or by the practices in those courts. Differences between courts The overall outcomes of cases at their first hearing have already been presented and discussed (see Table 6, p. 20, above). Here we examine them in relation to each individual court. Given the possible influence of the claimant on the outcome we wanted to see how far outcomes in cases reflected the requests made by landlords. Chart 1 below compares, for all cases observed in the four sample courts, the requests made by the claimant for a particular order (where recorded), and the outcomes of those requests at the first hearing. It shows that fewer possession orders, both outright (OPO) and suspended (SPO), were granted than requested, and more adjournments were granted than requested. (The ‘other’ category includes cases which were withdrawn, struck out, or dismissed, but the numbers in this category are too small for any meaningful distinctions to be made between these outcomes.) Chart 1: Requests and outcomes in all four courts (n=540) 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% OPO SPO Adjourn Other 22 request outcome The following charts, 2-5 provide the same information for each court, enabling comparisons to be made between them.
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: Table 6: Impact of participation on
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 and 120:
important determining factors is th
Page 121 and 122:
Thus it is likely that that even 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?