Council to review its housing allocation scheme in face of discrimination claim by Irish Traveller

3 February 2016

In R (VC) v North Somerset Council (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening) CO/3801/2015, a Council has settled a judicial review claim which had argued it’s housing allocations scheme was discriminatory against Gypsies and Travellers, in particular the “local connection” requirement. The Claimant was represented by Marc Willers QC (Garden Court Chambers) and Joseph Markus of Garden Court North Chambers.

This claim concerned a challenge brought by an Irish Traveller to a “local connection” requirement contained within North Somerset Council’s housing allocations scheme, which had been extended beyond Part VI Housing Act 1996 allocations to cover Gypsy/Traveller site allocations. The effect of that requirement was that the Claimant, who could not point to a local connection to North Somerset, was denied entry to the Council’s housing register.

The claim was brought on a number of grounds including, in particular, that the Council had failed to pay due regard to statutory equality objectives (in accordance with section 149 of the Equality Act 2010) and that the local connection requirement was, in any event, indirectly discriminatory in relation to Gypsies and Travellers and unjustifiably so.

The Claimant had argued that many ethnic Gypsies and Travellers still lived a nomadic lifestyle (in the absence of sufficient permanent sites to meet their accommodation needs) and that, as a consequence, the local connection requirement was likely to have an adverse effect on proportionately more Gypsies and Travellers than members of the settled population.

The Claimant’s case was supported by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which agreed that there was a differential impact and that it was difficult to see how a local connection requirement in an allocations scheme could ever be justified for ethnic groups whose members are nomadic.

The Defendant Council did not file any evidence to suggest that it had discharged its duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 or to support its position that any discrimination could be objectively justified.

In the event the case settled on the day before the trial of the claim and, on 2 February 2016, Collins J approved an order by which the Defendant Council undertook:

(a) To place the Claimant on its housing register; and

(b) To undertake a review of its housing allocations scheme, specifically with reference to section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

Collins J also ordered the Defendant Council to pay the Claimant’s costs of bringing the claim for judicial review.

Joseph was instructed by Parminder Sanghera of the Community Law Partnership.

Chambers news

Chambers news

Covid-19 Inquiry: Module 7 hears asymptomatic spread of Covid not taken seriously enough

The UK Government’s ‘Test, Trace and Isolate’ programmes cost £37bn in total budget. Credit: Ascannio / Shutterstock.   Earlier today (30 May 2025), public hearings...

Chambers news

Professor Javaid Rehman and Pete Weatherby KC: A Conversation on Human Rights in Iran

Professor Javaid Rehman (pictured) served as United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran from 2018 to...

Chambers news

Celebrating Legal Aid – Garden Court North members speak at Young Legal Aid Lawyers’ 20th anniversary party

Garden Court North’s Anna Morris KC (pictured) speaking at LPAG’s Young Legal Aid Lawyers’ 20th anniversary party on 23 May 2025. Credit: Frederique Bellec.  ...

Chambers news

Serious failings by corporate parent and other agencies contributed to Nonita Grabovskyte’s death, inquest finds

Garden Court North’s Ciara Bartlam represented INQUEST and Article 39 pro bono in Nonita’s inquest at North London Coroner’s Court (pictured). Credit: Richard Kelly /...

Sign up to our mailing list

Our mailing list is dedicated to professionals with an interest in our work.

Sign up