Guernsey Legal Resources

    The appellant lived in a rented open market property. As part of the States’ approval of a new open market housing development, a number of existing open market properties elsewhere on the Island had to be de-registered, and, for this to be done, had either to be unoccupied or to be occupied by a qualified resident or a resident with a housing licence. In May 2002, the landlord informed the appellant that it intended to de-register the property he was renting, and in subsequent years confirmed that it was still obliged to seek de-registration. Believing that his tenancy would soon be terminated, in 2004 the appellant applied to the Housing Department for a housing licence, but the application and subsequent appeals to the Department in 2005 and the Royal Court (Finch, Lieut. Bailiff) in 2006 were dismissed. In March 2008, the landlord notified the appellant that it intended to increase its open market rent rates by 28% from April of that year, with a further 21.9% increase from the following April. The increase was beyond the appellant’s means, and he then made a fresh application for a housing licence so that he could remain in the property rather than having to seek alternative accommodation. Meanwhile, he took in a lodger to help pay the rent. His application was rejected on the grounds that the rent increases were not excessive and merely brought the rent up to market rates; he had taken in a lodger and therefore had assistance with the rent; and it was the landlord’s decision, not the Housing Department’s, which had caused his difficulties.

    The appellant appealed against the decision to dismiss his application for a licence, on the bases that, inter alia, the decision was an interference with his right under art. 8 of the European Convention to respect for his private and family life and his home, and the detrimental impact on his standard of living and well-being as a result of the decision was unfair.