Headingley Councillors disappointed at Court Ruling on Madeleine Joy (Leeds Liberal Democrats)

Leeds Liberal Democrats <info@leedslibdems.org.uk>

Headingley Councillors disappointed at Court Ruling on Madeleine Joy

July 7, 2003 12:00 AM

Headingley Councillors have expressed disappointment at Friday's High Court ruling. The judge ruled that the owner of Madeleine Joy Home had breached planning regulations by allowing people to move into the property without planning permission, but since tenancy contracts had already been signed there was nothing that could be done. An injunction preventing further residents moving in will only apply from July 2004.

Cllr Martin Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Headingley) said "It seems perverse that a landlord can break the planning rules so clearly and yet there is nothing that can be done to prevent him from benefiting from his actions. This once again underlines the severe weaknesses in current planning rules where the odds are stacked in favour of the developer. Headingley Councillors will be writing to John Prescott to express our concerns."

Cllr Greg Mulholland (Liberal Democrat, Headingley) added "Clearly, Officers must investigate other legal avenues in the light of this decision. In the meantime the owner has applied for planning permission to convert the property into a House in Multiple Occupation. We will be vigorously opposing this."

Cllr Hamilton said "This should not be seen as a confrontation between students and their neighbours. Planning rules are there to protect tenants and neighbours alike. Landlords must not be allowed to flout planning rules without any come-back".

Headingley Councillors have asked Officers to produce a full report on this

case, in particular it should address two key issues:

1. The quality of legal advice given to the Council. It now appears that there was no prospect of obtaining a retrospective injunction from 1 July 2003, yet Ward Councillors were advised that a retrospective Injunction was possible, and

2. Whether the delay in the Council taking legal action (evidence was

in place three weeks ago) had a negative impact on the court judgement.