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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

were aware of colleagues’ approaches in the same court, as is evident from the section on London court, above. The same was true of other courts: “We have frequent chats. We all know the difficulties, you know…I think we would all be adopting the same sort of approach when it comes to reasonableness and things of that nature, and suspensions of warrants and so on and so forth.” (DJ W) “Usually the possession stuff, it’s pretty run of the mill and routine, and if something unusual comes along, like if there’s a new advocate or something for one of the housing associations, who’s perhaps been a bit heavy or something like that, when it might come up in conversation. …I think we probably are fairly consistent.” (DJ V) Most of the district judges interviewed considered discussions with colleagues very valuable in developing consistency, whether in the same court or at training courses: “It’s fair to say most of it you pick it up off each other.” (DJ J) “In a three day residential training session, there will always be an hour or two on housing… And also of course, these courses are very useful to talk to other people informally and you share what you’re doing.” (DJ F) If colleagues at the same court took a different approach, the interviewees seemed very aware; for example: “[Name of colleague] takes a more legalistic view…a very extreme view I would say, it’s the other end of the spectrum. ...he’s been here for fifteen years so it’s ‘his’ court.” (DJ A) A few of the judges we interviewed sat regularly in more than one court in the same area. This practice proved a great aid to consistency as it enabled these judges to see what had become familiar from a different viewpoint. One district judge who had the benefit of sitting at another court hearing possession cases one day a month, felt that it: Conclusion “helps, just seeing sort of how different people approach cases…a bit of experience of dealing with things in a different way.” (DJ Z) The participants in the focus groups were able to point to examples of different approaches and outcomes between judges in their local courts. The focus groups expressed concern that similar cases led to different outcomes in different courts. The quantitative data from this study indicates that there are, indeed, variations between the four courts in this sample, both in terms of outcomes granted in similar cases and the likelihood that claimants will obtain the orders which they seek. Various possible explanations for this have been explored: differences between courts in levels of arrears; the familiarity which claimants have with their local district judge, leading to a tailoring of orders 39
sought with what they know the judge is likely to grant; the availability of housing advice locally and a duty desk scheme at court; and housing benefit problems. Particular court cultures have emerged from an examination of the quantitative and qualitative data. The four courts in our sample represent differences in terms of the building’s age and architectural style; presence or absence of duty desk schemes; relationship with particular landlords; prevalence of housing benefit problems; and throughput of cases. It would be unsafe to suggest causal connections between particular factors and outcomes in the different courts on the basis of this small sample of cases, but the following are noteworthy: A combination of high levels of attendance by tenants, duty desk scheme, and pressure from high numbers of cases in the list, may lead to an above-average number of adjournments (London court). A combination of spacious refurbished building, duty desk scheme, and a low number of cases per session, may facilitate agreements and consequent low proportion of adjournment requests being granted (West Country court) A combination of no duty desk scheme, low number of cases where housing benefit problems are raised, and a practice of accepting agreements reached outside the court and presented only by a ‘repeat player’ landlord rather than both parties, may lead to an above-average number of orders granted and a low proportion of adjournments (Northern 2 court). The interviews with district judges explored various factors which could have an effect on consistency; for example, length of experience; type of legal practice before appointment; attitudes to training and updating. Although there were considerable variations between judges relating to these factors, there was no discernible relation between the judges’ experience and attitudes and their outcomes they suggested to the scenarios discussed in the interviews. Most of the judges who were interviewed considered that consistency – both within one court, and across courts – was important. However, they differed on whether they saw housing possession cases as involving complex decision-making, and whether the initial or updating training provided to them was useful or indeed adequate. Most of the district judges interviewed were aware of colleagues’ views and saw discussion with colleagues as a useful aid to knowledge and to consistency. The practice of sitting in more than one court was also potentially an aid to consistency of procedure, approach and outcome. Similarly, 40
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: Table 7: Sources of training and up
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 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?