Supreme Court judges refuse permission to appeal in case on warrant suspension applications and disability discrimination

A panel of Supreme Court judges has refused to grant permission to appeal to a tenant seeking to put forward an argument of disability discrimination when facing enforcement of a suspended possession order (SPO).

The tenant, Mr Neville, claimed that his admitted anti-social behaviour had been a result of personality and behavioural disorders. He argued that the disorders amounted to a disability under the Equality Act 2010 and therefore, the possession proceedings were discriminatory.

A Recorder had agreed with the tenant, Mr Neville, that the Equality Act 2010 considerations should have been reconsidered at the enforcement stage, and so the warrant was suspended.

In Paragon Asra Housing Ltd v Neville [2018] EWCA Civ 1712 Paragon successfully appealed. The housing association submitted before the Court of Appeal that the district judge who granted the SPO had already determined that the order did not discriminate against Mr Neville on the basis of his disability, and therefore the enforcement of that order did not discriminate against the defendant. 

See: Warrant suspension applications – Baljit Basra of Anthony Collins Solicitors' analysis of the Court of Appeal’s ruling.

In the list of recent permission decisions of the Supreme Court, published this week, a panel comprising Lady Hale (President), Lord Hodge and Lord Briggs decided last month that permission to appeal should be refused “because the application does not raise an arguable point of law which ought to be considered at this time.  Even if it were arguable, this would not be the right case in which to decide it.”