Joseph Markus

Public law

Joseph is ranked as a Leading Junior Tier 2 for Administrative and public law (including civil liberties and human rights) in The Legal 500, 2025.

Joseph is a judicial review specialist, with a practice covering his core areas of practice as well as a range of other fields. Some examples of his work in this area include: 

• R (Elkundi) & Ors v Birmingham City Council [2022] EWCA Civ 601 and [2021] EWHC 1024 (Admin): These linked cases concerned a systemic challenge to the defendant’s system of dealing with rehousing those to whom it owes housing duties under homelessness legislation. Various claimants were awarded mandatory orders requiring the defendant to rehouse them.
• R (Rayner) v Leeds Magistrates’ Court [2021] EWHC 1964 (Admin): This case concerned a challenge on fair trial grounds to a failure to adjourn an application for a premises closure order in circumstances where an application for legal aid remained outstanding; 
• R (Elkundi) v Birmingham City Council [2021] EWHC 1024 (Admin): This case concerned the nature of the main housing duty under section 193(2) Housing Act 1996, and whether the authority operated an unlawful system for the discharge of that duty; 
• R (Bangs) v SSHD: In this case, a declaration of incompatibility was made by consent under section 4 Human Rights Act 1998 in view of historic discrimination within British nationality law; 
• R (Kiarie) v SSHD [2017] UKSC 42: This was the successful challenge to the “deport first, appeal later” scheme, on the basis that it was incapable of fair operation in the claimant’s case; 

• R (KL (Albania)) v SSHD [2016] EWCA Civ 605: This appeal was designated as a lead appeal concerning the correct approach to certification of human rights claims as ‘clearly unfounded’; 
• R (Gudanaviciene) v Director of Legal Aid Casework [2014] EWCA Civ 1622: This was a successful challenge to the Lord Chancellor’s guidance dealing with exceptional case funding and to a decision to refuse funding to the claimant for her deportation appeal; 
• R (Nealon) v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] EWCA Civ 355: This case concerned a challenge to the amended section 133 Criminal Justice Act 1988, which governs compensation for miscarriages of justice, on the basis that the amended form was incompatible with the presumption of innocence protected by Article 6(2) ECHR; and 
• R (MS) v Independent Monitor [2016] EWHC 655 (Admin): A successful challenge to the Independent Monitor’s decision that information – arising from a series of aged allegations of indecency towards females – contained within an enhanced criminal records certificate was relevant, credible and ought to be disclosed. 

Housing & Homelessness

Joseph is ranked as a Leading Junior Tier 1 for Social housing in The Legal 500, 2025.

Joseph has experience of a broad range of housing and homelessness cases, including possession trials, homelessness appeals, claims for unlawful eviction and housing disrepair, judicial review, committal and injunction applications, as well as the closure orders regime under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. His work includes: 

• R (Elkundi) & Ors v Birmingham City Council [2022] EWCA Civ 601 and [2021] EWHC 1024 (Admin): These linked cases concerned a systemic challenge to the defendant’s system of dealing with rehousing those to whom it owes housing duties under homelessness legislation. Various claimants were awarded mandatory orders requiring the defendant to rehouse them.
• AM v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police [2021] EWHC 796 (Admin): This case was an appeal by way of case stated against a finding by the Youth Court that the appellant had breached an injunction. The High Court clarified the nature of the consultation requirement before breach proceedings could be initiated; 
• Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Ltd v Izevbigie [2017] EWHC 790 (Ch): This case concerned the lead regional case concerning whether agreements with United Utilities amounted to an agreement for the sale and re-sale of water within the meaning of the Water Resale Order 2006.

Joe has a particular interest in Gypsy/Traveller cases and has experience of Mobile Homes Act and trespasser possession claims across both England and Wales. His cases include: 

• R (VC) v North Somerset Council: This case concerned a successful challenge to the Council’s housing allocation scheme, on the basis that its “local connection” requirement indirectly discriminated against Gypsies and Travellers and that in framing that requirement the Council failed to comply with its public sector equality duty; and 

• R (O’Brien) v Bristol City Council [2014] EWHC 2423 (Admin): Joe obtained an injunction on behalf of a family of Irish Travellers facing eviction from a site beneath the M5 motorway.

Community care & mental health

Joseph is experienced in community care work arising out of housing and immigration cases and is instructed in appeals before the Administrative Appeals Chamber of the Upper Tribunal, often pro bono. His reported cases include: 

• Secretary of State for Work & Pensions v AN (PIP) [2015] UKUT 681 (AAC): An appeal concerning the correct interpretation of Activity 3 of the PIP Regulations; 
• Secretary of State for Work & Pensions v PG (JSA) [2015] UKUT 616 (AAC): An appeal in which the tribunal departed from an earlier decision to hold that an applicant could rely on the DWP website (for the purpose of establishing that he had been misled) when seeking to backdate a claim for benefit; and 
• AB v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions (DLA) [2015] UKUT 89 (AAC): An appeal which concerned the treatment of “non-renewal” claims for benefit. 

Notable cases

Supreme Court

• R (Kiarie) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 42, [2017] 1 WLR 2380, [2017] HRLR 7: Lead challenge to the Home Secretary’s “deport first, appeal later” power, inter alia, on the basis that removing an appellant pending his or her appeal is incompatible with the procedural protections conferred by Article 8 ECHR.

Court of Appeal

• R (Elkundi) & Ors v Birmingham City Council [2022] EWCA Civ 601 and [2021] EWHC 1024 (Admin): These linked cases concerned a systemic challenge to the defendant’s system of dealing with rehousing those to whom it owes housing duties under homelessness legislation. Various claimants were awarded mandatory orders requiring the defendant to rehouse them.
• R (FR (Albania)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 605, [2016] Imm AR 1341: Lead appeals concerning the correct approach to be taken to cases where the Home Secretary certifies a claim as being clearly unfounded;
• R (Nealon) v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] EWCA Civ 355, [2017] QB 571, [2016] 3 WLR 329, [2016] 2 Cr App R 11, [2016] Crim LR 772: Court of Appeal rejects claim that miscarriage of justice compensation provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 are incompatible with the presumption of innocence;
• R (Kiarie) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1020, [2016] 1 WLR 1961, [2016] 3 All ER 741, [2016] Imm AR 209, [2016] INLR 212; and
• R (Gudanaviciene) v Director of Legal Aid Casework & Anr (British Red Cross Society intervening) [2014] EWCA Civ 1622, [2015] 1 WLR 2247, [2015] 3 All ER 827: Court of Appeal concludes that Lord Chancellor’s exceptional case funding guidance wrongly mischaracterised the case-law on Articles 6 and 8 ECHR and decided that funding was required in TG’s case to avoid a violation of Article 47 CFR in a deportation appeal.

High Court

• Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Ltd v Izevbigie (United Utilities Water Ltd intervening) [2017] EWHC 790 (Ch): Lead case concerning whether RBH’s agreement with United Utilities amounted to an agreement for the sale and re-sale of water within the meaning of the Water Resale Order 2006;
• R (MS) v The Independent Monitor of the Home Office [2016] EWHC 655 (Admin), [2016] 4 WLR 88: Successful challenge to the Independent Monitor’s decision that information contained within an enhanced criminal records certificate was relevant and credible and ought to be disclosed;
• R (Nealon) v Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EWHC 1565 (Admin);
• R (O’Brien & Anr) v Bristol City Council (Secretary of State for Transport intervening) [2014] EWHC 2423 (Admin): Eviction of family of travellers from unauthorised encampment in Bristol; challenge to suitability of ‘bricks and mortar’ interim accommodation; and
• R (Gudanaviciene) v Director of Legal Aid Casework & Anr [2014] EWHC 1840 (Admin).

Upper Tribunal

• OO (Burma – TS remains appropriate CG) Burma [2018] UKUT 52 (IAC): Country guidance which confirms that despite signs of improvement and the new civilian-led government of Burma, there continues to be a risk of persecution for political activists;
• Secretary of State for Work & Pensions v AN (PIP) [2015] UKUT 681 (AAC): Appeal concerning the correct interpretation of Activity 3 of the PIP Regulations;
• Secretary of State for Work & Pensions v PG (JSA) [2015] UKUT 616 (AAC): Established on appeal, contrary to a different Upper Tribunal authority, that an applicant can rely on the DWP website when seeking to backdate a claim for benefit; and
• AB v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions (DLA) [2015] UKUT 89 (AAC): Appeal concerning the treatment of non-renewal claims for benefit.

Publications and media appearances

• Contributor, Macdonald’s Immigration Law and Practice (9^th, Butterworths: London, 2015);
• ‘When are the best interests and welfare of the child relevant and how can they be used in housing-related claims? Part 2: Application’ (2015) 18 Journal of Housing Law 10;
• ‘When are the best interests and welfare of the child relevant and how can they be used in housing-related claims? Part 1: Principles’ (2014) 17(6) Journal of Housing Law 118; and
• ‘What is the use of a human right to development? Legal pluralism, “participation” and a tentative rehabilitation’ (2014) 41(3) Journal of Law and Society. 

Memberships

• Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) Panel of Preferred Counsel (“B Panel”);
• ILPA;
• HLPA;
• Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers; and
• Liberty.

Privacy Notice

Joseph’s Privacy Notice may be viewed by clicking here.

Recommendations