Council possession claim rejected after it dismissed long-term homosexual partner of tenant as friend in succession case

Islington Council has been ordered to pay costs after the dismissal of possession proceedings it brought against a tenant that the council did not consider was in a homosexual relationship with the former tenant, who had passed away.

The original tenant of the council flat, Mr Evripidou, died in November 2020.

Islington brought possession proceedings against the second defendant, Mr Bariotakis, who was living at the flat and was the long-term partner of the deceased at the time of his death.

The council disputed both the fact that (1) they were living ‘as if they were a married couple or civil partners’ – instead suggesting they were just friends – and (2) that the second defendant was living there as his only/principal home at the time of the deceased’s death.

According to Garden Court Chambers, Mr Bariotakis had been open to some people about his relationship with Mr Evripidou, “but was not open to everyone because of the stigma attached to homosexuality in his culture (Greek Cypriot)”.

Giving an oral judgment on 7 March 2024, District Judge Hayes found that the second defendant had been living at the flat at the time of the deceased’s death, and that they were in a “committed, stable, independent, interdependent same sex relationship, as if they were married”.

Accordingly, he had succeeded the tenancy under section 86A of the Housing Act 1986.

A declaration was made that Mr Bariotakis had succeeded the tenancy, and Islington was ordered to pay his costs of the claim.

However, it is understood that the defendant was ordered to pay Islington's costs of defending an unsuccessful counterclaim for discrimination.

Garden Court Chambers said: “Throughout the case, the council had treated a requirement to succeed the tenancy as Mr Bariotakis having to live at the Property for a year until Mr Evripidou’s death. However, given this was a post-Localism Act tenancy, this was clearly not the test. Rather, the test was if “(a) P occupies the dwelling-house as P's only or principal home at the time of the tenant's death, and (b) P is the tenant's spouse or civil partner” (S.86A HA 1986). There is no requirement for a one-year living period for post-Localism Act tenancies of this kind.

“The case sheds light on evidential issues whereby a tenant may be closeted due to cultural reasons and stigma, but still has to show to the council (and if unsuccessful, the court) that he was in a committed homosexual relationship akin to being a spouse in order to succeed the tenancy.”

An Islington Council spokesperson said: "We accept the judgment and will review the findings so we can carry out all appropriate learnings. The council takes its equalities obligations seriously and the court did not find that the council had acted in a discriminatory fashion."

Oscar Davies and Adrian Marshall Williams of Garden Court Chambers represented the second defendant, instructed by Serdar Celebi at Islington Law Centre via legal aid.

Lottie Winson