Subject-Matter Index

Appeals. See Housing licences—appeal to Royal Court

burden of proof

under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.56(3), person aggrieved has overall burden of showing Department’s decision ultra vires or unreasonable—under European Convention, art. 8(2), Department (as public authority) has burden of showing interference with Convention right “necessary in a democratic society”: Thomas v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2007–08 GLR 251

hearing de novo

Royal Court to disregard outcome of earlier appeal to Housing Department, since Department considers application afresh on appeal and court to do same—to consider all relevant factors anew and conduct balancing exercise in deciding whether licence decision correct: Boulton v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR N [9]

reasons for appeal decision

no reliance on appeal on matter not raised with appellant either at trial or pre-trial—under both local and European Convention law, appellant entitled to know basis of adverse decision in reasonable detail—no reliance on Housing Needs Survey on appeal if no evidence that affected mind of original decision-maker and never previously mentioned to appellant: Thomas v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2007–08 GLR 251

Circumstances of applicant. See Housing licences—applicability of European Convention on Human Rights. Housing licences—Board’s discretion. Qualified residential status—discretion of Department

Compassionate licences. See Housing licences—Board’s discretion

Compatibility of housing licence with European Convention. See Housing licences—applicability of European Convention on Human Rights

Conditions of housing licence. See Housing licences—conditions

Employment-related housing licences. See Housing licences—employment-related licences

Extension of licences. See Housing licences—extension of licences

Hearing de novo. See Appeals—hearing de novo

Housing licences

appeal to Royal Court

two grounds of appeal under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.56(1), i.e. decision ultra vires or unreasonable—whether Authority exercised power unreasonably is question of fact: Walters v. States Housing Auth. (C.A.), 1997–99 GLR 15

applicability of European Convention on Human Rights

attempt under European Convention, art. 8(2), to justify interference with applicant’s rights under art. 8(1) by reference to economic well-being of Island, not given genuine statistical support by Housing Needs Survey—Survey’s calculation of net shortfall in housing inaccurate because fails to consider construction of new properties and conversions of old properties—if supply of new dwellings from any source exceeds demand, applicant’s claim to licence strengthened: Kinley v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 157

no engagement of European Convention, art. 8 by applicant’s taking lodger voluntarily, rather than as condition imposed by Housing Department—need to pay extra rent or leave accommodation caused by landlord’s rent policy, not Department’s condition: Boulton v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR N [9]

no engagement of European Convention, art. 8 when Housing Department decides whether to consider further application for housing licence under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6A, since merely determining whether qualitative changes in applicant’s circumstances: Carr v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2011–12 GLR N [22]

objective of housing licences (i.e. to control limited housing resources for benefit of community) accepted by European Court as legitimate—under European Convention, art. 8(2), for state to show that interference with individual’s Convention right meets pressing social need but no greater than required to meet state’s legitimate objective: Thomas v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2007–08 GLR 251

refusal of licence not interference with European Convention, art. 8 rights if not cause of applicant’s need to take lodger to help pay rent or find other accommodation: Boulton v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR N [9]

respect for “home” under European Convention, art. 8(1) applies to particular residential property, rather than whole Island—includes “home from time to time” and art. 8(1) therefore engaged by refusal of licence for home to which applicant proposes to move: Forrest v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2013 GLR N [3]

under European Convention, art. 8(2), Board to justify proportionate interference with applicant’s rights under art. 8(1) when rejecting application—required to identify to applicant the pressing need justifying interference, by specific reference to grounds stated in art. 8(2), e.g. economic well-being of Island, protection of rights and freedoms of others, etc.: Kinley v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 157

applicant’s length of residence

Board’s consideration of “periods during which applicant resident in Guernsey or elsewhere” under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6(2)(b)(ii) not purely arithmetical exercise—to consider why and how long lived elsewhere, e.g. born and educated in UK, worked elsewhere in UK for short periods, and why and how long living in Guernsey, e.g. worked here for longer than elsewhere, employment contract and housing licence already extended, and treats Guernsey as home: Kinley v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 157

Authority’s discretion

may consider Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6(2)(a) (periods and circumstances of residence) and (b) (familial connections) separately or together: X v. States Housing Auth. (Royal Ct.), 1997–99 GLR 349

Board’s discretion

Board to balance relevant factors and arrive at proportionate decision—although open market residents not normally granted housing licences, exception may be justified as proportionate, e.g. if States’ planning development policy forces long-term resident out of home, cannot afford other open market property, strong Guernsey familial connections, and granting licence sets only limited precedent for other open market residents: Campbell v. States Housing Auth. (Royal Ct.), 2000–02 GLR 367

compassionate licences—under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6, Board may consider application for compassionate licence—not to be granted on grounds of termination of fixed-term employment contract and corresponding housing licence: Carr v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2011–12 GLR N [22]

in considering applicability of departmental policy, not sufficient merely to decide that applicant for licence falls outside scope of policy—duty also to consider whether policy should be disapplied in appropriate circumstances: Kinley v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 157

in exercising discretion under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6A to consider further application for housing licence, court to consider whether “significant change in any material circumstances”—employment status of applicant’s spouse not “material circumstance,” since obtained by virtue of applicant’s status: Carr v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2011–12 GLR N [22]

in exercising discretion under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6A to consider further application for housing licence, court to consider whether “significant change in any material circumstances”—phrase to be given ordinary meaning in absence of guidance in legislation—“material circumstances” are those relevant to decision-making process, including factors Board took into account in refusing original application: Carr v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2011–12 GLR N [22]

may apply States’ planning development policy to licence decisions, but policy to conform with law, not modify, extend or contradict it—Authority to be prepared, if appropriate, to make exceptions: Campbell v. States Housing Auth. (Royal Ct.), 2000–02 GLR 367

may not fetter exercise of discretion by relying on opinion of another Government department without question: Kinley v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 157

no grant of housing licence to open market resident merely because other open market property too expensive for her: Campbell v. States Housing Auth. (Royal Ct.), 2000–02 GLR 367

setting precedent—if refuses licence application because sets precedent for “substantial number” of other residents, Board to enquire how many others similarly affected—may in fact be proportionate to grant licence if sets precedent for very few other residents: Campbell v. States Housing Auth. (Royal Ct.), 2000–02 GLR 367

under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6A, Board has “no obligation” to consider further application for housing licence if no “significant change in any material circumstances”—adverse circumstances present or foreseeable at beginning of licence period (e.g. health problems, and loss of accommodation and income following end of fixed-term employment and corresponding housing licence) not “significant change in any material circumstances”: Carr v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2011–12 GLR N [22]

under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6A, Board has “no obligation” to consider further application for housing licence if no “significant change in any material circumstances”—in absence of statutory guidance, court to bear in mind policy behind s.6A, i.e. preventing Board from having to consider successive similar applications, and preventing applicant’s artificially lengthening stay and strengthening ties in Guernsey: Carr v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2011–12 GLR N [22]

conditions

condition specifying with whom non-qualified resident may live, or requiring occupation of own home with locally-qualified resident, is breach of European Convention, art. 8 right to respect for private life and home—disproportionate interference with individual’s Convention right: Thomas v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2007–08 GLR 251

deeming unlicensed occupation equivalent to licensed occupation. See Qualified residential status—discretion of Department

employment-related licences

if application made by teacher relying on scheme affecting employment, Board required to consider Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6(2)(a)—wrong to disregard merely because Education Department advises that applicant not qualified for scheme—applicant to be informed of basis on which application actually considered: Kinley v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 157

termination of fixed-term employment contract and corresponding housing licence causing adverse change in circumstances not ground for granting subsequent compassionate licence: Carr v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2011–12 GLR N [22]

extension of licences

refusal of extension justified if proportionate, i.e. appropriate and reasonable response by Authority to identifiable circumstances—normally unhelpful for court to consider allegedly comparable decisions in deciding on proportionality, since depend on individual circumstances and reasons unlikely to be recorded: Foley v. States Housing Auth. (Royal Ct.), 2003–04 GLR 137

when considering whether reasonable not to extend licence, court to have regard only to material before Authority at time of decision, though should not be blind to later developments—if relevant new information appears after decision, matter to be remitted to Authority for further consideration: Foley v. States Housing Auth. (Royal Ct.), 2003–04 GLR 137

human rights issues. See Housing licences—applicability of European Convention on Human Rights

open market residents. See Housing licences—Board’s discretion

fact that applicant was open market resident was relevant but not overriding factor in assessment of his application under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.6(2)(b)—any potential incapacity to achieve s.10 status as qualified resident not conclusive against applicant—Housing Authority obliged to take account of factors in s.6(2)(b) and entitled to take into account factors in s.6(5): Matheson v. States Housing Auth. (C.A.), 1997–99 GLR 110

procedure of Board

Board to take meticulous care in considering applications and scrupulously balancing conflicting interests—documentation of decision-making process to be complete, including statements about matters discussed, full minuting of discussion, voting, etc.—decision to be communicated to applicant without delay, or delay explained—decision letter to give as much information as possible to enable applicant to exercise legitimate right of appeal: Kinley v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 157

proportionality. See Housing licences—Board’s discretion

Housing Needs Survey. See Appeals—reasons for appeal decision. Housing licences—applicability of European Convention on Human Rights

Lodgers. See Housing licences—conditions

Open market properties. See Housing licences—Board’s discretion. Housing licences—open market residents

Proportionality. See Housing licences—Board’s discretion. Housing licences—extension of licences

Qualified residential status

child living partly in jurisdiction

if child relocates with mother to France but parents have shared residence order and child spends 25% of time with father in Guernsey, Housing Department might consider, for purposes of housing qualifications, that child ordinarily resident in Guernsey when stays with father in Guernsey: M v. F (Royal Ct.), 2014 GLR 310

discretion of Department

in exercising discretion under Housing (Control of Occupation) (Guernsey) Law 1994, s.10(2)(j)(iii) to make decision conferring status, Department to consider all circumstances of applicant since commenced residence in Guernsey—includes residence with parents, occupation under employment-related licence and all personal circumstances up to date of exercising discretion—failure to consider age, overall length of residence, family circumstances, commitment to permanent residence in Guernsey, essential nature of professional employment, etc., may be breach of right to respect for private life protected by European Convention, art. 8: Jolly v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2007–08 GLR 426

may be breach of right to respect for private life if Department refuses to grant residential status and also declines to give firm commitments on duration of future occupational licences or give guidance on significance of possible changes in applicant’s circumstances—decision introducing unwarranted uncertainty into future position of long-term resident professional person interferes with right to personal autonomy protected by art. 8: Jolly v. Housing Dept. (Minister) (Royal Ct.), 2007–08 GLR 426