Possession Proportionate

West Kent Housing Association has successfully recovered possession against a tenant who defended the claim on the grounds 'proportionality', made famous in the 'Pinnock' Supreme Court ruling. The housing association pursued possession against the tenant, Mr Alan Grant after receiving complaints of anti-social behaviour. Mr Grant’s main defences were that the possession process had been "unlawful" and was "disproportionate" within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. His defences were dismissed summarily in the Tunbridge Wells County Court, the latter in accordance with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Manchester City Council v Pinnock . Mr Grant claimed that the housing association had other remedies available including an anti-social behaviour injunction. Dismissing the defence, District Judge Hebblethwaite found that Mr Grant had agreed to a starter tenancy and was aware of the consequences of breaching its terms. In light of the anti-social behaviour that Mr Grant had admitted, it was not seriously arguable that evicting him was disproportionate. Mr Grant's case was dismissed and an outright possession order was made, enforceable in 14 days.