Newham v Chaplair: the lessons to be learned
Language: English Publication details: Local Government lawyer, 30 November 2023Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: Archie Maddan explains what was involved in the first successful prosecution of a tower block owner for failure to remove flammable cladding. Newham v Chaplair was a prosecution under s30 of the Housing Act 2004 for failure to comply with an Improvement Notice. Specifically Chaplair, which was the freeholder of the block of flats, failed to remove dangerous cladding by the deadline specified in the Improvement Notice. he trial was entirely concerned with whether the circumstances of the failure to carry out the works amounted to a reasonable excuse. The judge, Deputy Chief Magistrate Ikram, found that they did not. Sentencing took place on 31 October, and Chaplair were ordered to pay a fine of £30,000 for the failure to remove the cladding as well as a substantial contribution to Newham’s costs.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | Virtual Online | Available |
Archie Maddan explains what was involved in the first successful prosecution of a tower block owner for failure to remove flammable cladding. Newham v Chaplair was a prosecution under s30 of the Housing Act 2004 for failure to comply with an Improvement Notice. Specifically Chaplair, which was the freeholder of the block of flats, failed to remove dangerous cladding by the deadline specified in the Improvement Notice. he trial was entirely concerned with whether the circumstances of the failure to carry out the works amounted to a reasonable excuse. The judge, Deputy Chief Magistrate Ikram, found that they did not. Sentencing took place on 31 October, and Chaplair were ordered to pay a fine of £30,000 for the failure to remove the cladding as well as a substantial contribution to Newham’s costs.