The High Court quashed Kerry County Council’s decision to suspend a family’s social housing application until 6 July 2020, finding the council had not given adequate reasons for confirming the suspension. The matter was remitted to the council for reconsideration of its January 2019 review.
Mr Justice Heslin ruled on a judicial review brought by Brendan Coffey, Sandra O’Brien and two minors. The court found that the council made a fresh decision on 24 January 2019 after reviewing earlier decisions, so the applicants were entitled to challenge that decision. It rejected the council’s submission that the case was an out-of-time collateral challenge to its February 2018 decision. That earlier decision remained undisturbed.
The council’s February 2018 decision suspended consideration of the joint housing application until July 2020, following Mr Coffey’s 2016 conviction for violent disorder. The incident occurred in August 2012. He pleaded guilty in November 2015 and received a two-year suspended sentence in July 2016. The court recorded that the prosecution accepted he had a lesser role than his co-accused and that there had been significant prosecutorial delay.
In November 2018, Mr Coffey also pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of drugs and was fined €250. The council initially extended the housing suspension to November 2020, but on 24 January 2019 it overturned and nullified that later decision. It accepted the applicants’ position that the drugs conviction related to personal use and should not be classified as anti-social behaviour. The court’s order concerned the separate decision confirming the suspension until July 2020.
The judge found that the council had considered the applicants’ mitigation, including the delay before Mr Coffey’s earlier case came to court. But the council had not explained why it rejected that mitigation, why the later drugs conviction affected its assessment despite being treated as non-anti-social behaviour, or how maintaining the suspension served good estate management in the circumstances. The court noted there was no evidence of repeat anti-social behaviour after the 2012 incident.
The court quashed the 24 January 2019 decision and directed the council to reconsider its January 2019 review in light of written submissions, including without-prejudice correspondence, and verbal submissions made by the applicants’ solicitor. The judge invited submissions on the precise wording of the order. The court did not decide the applicants’ other grounds of challenge.