The High Court has ordered South Dublin County Council to provide the O’Donnell family with adequate temporary accommodation while they await permanent housing, after finding that overcrowding was preventing a disabled child from using the adaptations in the family’s mobile home.
In a judgment delivered on 11 January 2008, Mr Justice John Edwards held that Ellen O’Donnell’s rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights were not being vindicated in relation to the overcrowding. The judge declared that the council must exercise its statutory powers to provide adequate temporary accommodation pending the family’s placement under its Traveller Accommodation Programme for 2005–2008.
He did not specify what accommodation the council must provide and expressly declined to order a second caravan. The exact form of the orders was left for further submissions from counsel.
The family, who were living at a temporary halting site at Whitestown Way in Tallaght, included two parents and seven children. Ellen has cerebral palsy and uses a wheelchair. The council accepted that the family’s accommodation was overcrowded and unfit for habitation. The court heard that the wheelchair could not fit into a bedroom, limiting Ellen’s ability to move around the adapted mobile home.
The council had provided the family with a wheelchair-accessible mobile home and a second caravan in 2003. The family later gave the second caravan to Mary O’Donnell’s mother. The council argued that the resulting overcrowding and the mobile home’s poor condition were attributable to the family’s actions and lack of maintenance. The judge was not persuaded by the explanation for giving away the caravan, and said the parents had not shown that they tried to obtain estimates or arrange repairs.
However, the judge also found that the council had known since 2005 that repairs were needed and had not established whether the family faced obstacles in arranging them. He said the council had a corresponding duty to engage with the parents, help them access repair services if needed, and assist them in obtaining a loan under the Caravan Loan Scheme for essential repairs. He rejected the claim that the parents could not afford repairs.
The court distinguished the family’s long-term accommodation position from the immediate problem. The council planned to provide permanent group housing, which the family had requested, and the judge expected that plan to be implemented by the end of December 2008. He found no failure at that stage to meet the council’s statutory duty concerning long-term accommodation.
The judge found no breach of Article 14 or of the applicants’ constitutional rights. He said only Ellen was entitled to damages for the Article 8 breach, which had not yet caused lasting physical or psychological harm. He deferred assessment of those damages and the precise orders.