Key Facts
- •Mr. Hussain was convicted of seven housing offences in 2018, which became spent convictions in September 2022.
- •A banning order was made against Mr. Hussain prohibiting him from letting or managing tenanted property for three years.
- •The FTT admitted evidence of the spent convictions under Section 7(3) of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.
- •Mr. Hussain appealed the FTT's decision on the admissibility of the spent convictions.
Legal Principles
Construction of "has been convicted" in Housing and Planning Act 2016, sections 15 and 16.
Housing and Planning Act 2016, sections 15 and 16
Admissibility of spent convictions under Section 7(3) of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, section 7(3)
The role of the Upper Tribunal in appeals from the FTT decisions.
Knapp v Bristol City Council [2023] UKUT 118 (LC)
Consideration of spent convictions in banning order applications.
Hussain v Waltham Forest LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 1539
Non-statutory guidance from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.
MHCLG Guidance
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The Upper Tribunal held that "has been convicted" in the 2016 Act includes spent convictions. The FTT's decision to admit evidence of the spent convictions under section 7(3) of the 1974 Act was not irrational.
The FTT's decision to impose a three-year banning order was upheld.
The FTT's decision to admit evidence of the spent convictions was justified under section 7(3) of the 1974 Act. The FTT properly considered the seriousness of the offences and the impact on Mr. Hussain.