The High Court has ruled that Limerick City and County Council unlawfully excluded a Traveller family from consideration for social housing for 12 months after the mother surrendered a tenancy following attacks on the property.
The applicants are a mother and her two minor children. Their identities and precise accommodation locations are protected by reporting restrictions.
The family had previously refused one housing offer in March 2023. In August that year, the council offered a supported tenancy through the Peter McVerry Trust. The mother initially raised safety concerns but accepted the offer and the family moved in during November.
Before occupation, threatening graffiti appeared on the property. On December 27, the front windows were smashed. A second incident followed days later when, according to the mother, someone attempted to enter the dwelling and rear windows were broken. The incidents were reported to Gardaí.
On January 2, 2024, the mother surrendered the tenancy despite advice from council and Peter McVerry Trust staff not to do so. The council then treated the surrender as a second refusal and excluded the household from housing allocations for a year.
Mr Justice Garrett Simons held that this was unlawful. Regulation 12 applies when a household refuses two reasonable offers. It does not allow an accepted offer to be retrospectively converted into a refusal merely because the resulting tenancy is later surrendered.
The council conceded that point during the hearing.
The judge also examined the council’s position on an alternative basis. He found no evidence of a proper assessment that the dwelling remained suitable after the attacks or that available supports were sufficient to address the family’s safety concerns.
Although the 12-month exclusion had already expired, the court decided the issue because the family remains within the social housing system and the interpretation of the regulation continues to have practical importance.
Other claims, including challenges concerning an alleged Traveller quota and general housing duties, were refused. A damages claim has not yet been decided and was adjourned for further argument.