Anti-social behaviour and European protection against eviction

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to assess the implementation of the minimum level of protection against the loss of the home that arises from Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in The Netherlands. The paper focuses on anti-social behaviour-related cases in which the landlord requests the court to issue an eviction order. Design/methodology/approach -The paper is based on a statistical analysis of nearly 250 judgements concerning housing-related anti-social behaviour. Findings -A significant difference is found in the court's attitude against drug-related anti-social behaviour and other types of nuisance. Moreover, it is found that in two-thirds of the cases, the tenant advanced a proportionality defence. Although the European Court stresses the need of a proportionality check, the Dutch courts ignore the tenant's proportionality defence in 10 per cent of the cases and issue an eviction order in the majority of all cases. Advancing a proportionality defence does not result in any difference for the court decision. Originality/value -The paper presents original data on the legal protection against eviction in cases concerning anti-social behaviour. This is the first study that analyses the approach towards housing-related anti-social behaviour in the context of the European minimum level of protection. Whilst centred on legislation and procedures in The Netherlands, its findings and discussion are relevant in other jurisdictions facing similar issues.

Relational versus local values of cultural heritage. Tourism gentrification and governance in context

“…In theory, the rental contract can be dissolved in such a case. Courts have not always done this as they are bound to weigh the proportionality of the measure (Vols et al 2015). A tenant in Rotterdam could stay in her dwelling as the housing association had not well communicated the specific Airbnb type of subletting, the tenant stopped subletting at the first signal of the landlord, was already living for 21 years in the dwelling, and had specific personal circumstances (Rechtbank Rotterdam, 2015).…”

Using machine learning to predict decisions of the European Court of Human Rights

“…For example, Hunter et al (2008, p. 79) state: 'This tradition has not been established in the United Kingdom, perhaps because we do not have a sufficient number of judges at the appropriate level who are not male and white to make such statistical analysis worthwhile'. Still, researchers have applied quantitative methods to datasets of case law from, for example, Belgium (De Jaeger 2017), the Czech Republic (Bricker 2017), France (Sulea et al 2017a), Germany (Dyevre 2015; Bricker 2017), Israel (Doron et al 2015), Latvia (Bricker 2017), the Netherlands (Vols et al 2015;Vols and Jacobs 2017;van Dijck 2018;Bruijn et al 2018), Poland (Bricker 2017), Slovenia (Bricker 2017), Spain (Garoupa et al 2012) and Sweden (Derlén and Lindholm 2018).…”