Historic Supreme Court victory establishes right to humane housing for Santa Teresa, a decision that could cost NT Government millions
THE Territory Government could be forced to pay remote residents millions of dollars in compensation after charging them rent for inadequate housing following a landmark ruling in the Supreme Court
Alice Springs
Don't miss out on the headlines from Alice Springs. Followed categories will be added to My News.
- Santa Teresa decision could cost NT Government tens of millions
- Santa Teresa residents win tribunal case against NT government
THE Territory government could be forced to pay remote residents millions of dollars in compensation after charging them rent for inadequate housing following a landmark ruling in the Supreme Court on Tuesday.
Santa Teresa woman Enid Young and another man, who has since died, took the government to the NT Civil and Administrative Tribunal last year.
NTCAT found the government did not adequately maintain their properties.
The tribunal ordered the government to pay Ms Young $100 in compensation after leaving her without a back door on her home for almost six years.
But lawyers for the pair appealed that ruling as inadequate and, on Tuesday, Justice Jenny Blokland increased the figure by more than 100 fold, ordering Ms Young be paid $10,200 “for the distress and disappointment associated with such a fundamental breach”.
Justice Blokland said a door was “the most basic way (to) ensure security” and landlords were legally obliged to provide one.
MORE NEWS
Thousands turn out to enjoy extreme motor action at Alice Springs
Rolfe’s lawyers to launch bid to have murder charge thrown out of court
“The complete absence of a back door was a fundamental failing by the respondent to provide reasonably secure premises of a ground level house,” she said.
“Ms Young is an elderly woman who was left vulnerable to proven animal intruders and potentially human intruders. She took steps to block off the door, but it is the respondent who was under a duty to provide secure premises.”
Justice Blokland also upheld another ground of appeal, ruling NTCA adopted too narrow a definition of the term “habitable” and remitted that issue back to the tribunal for reconsideration.
”The assessment of whether the premises were habitable should have included not only the health and safety of tenants but an overall assessment of the humaneness, suitability and reasonable comfort of the premises, even if only basic amenities are provided, judged against contemporary standards,” she said.
Lawyer Dan Kelly, who represented the residents, said the “historic win” would have implications for residents in up to 70 other remote NT communities who could be in line for similar levels of compensation.
“Other First Nations communities with almost carbon copies of the same housing issues, have been monitoring this case very closely,” he said.
”We’re acting for Laramba, another remote community and expect that others will now look at how the standards established by the Supreme Court could be transferred to their communities.
“Government must work with Aboriginal peaks to ensure all housing is climate change resilient, meets housing for health principles, is culturally appropriate in design and control is developed to communities.”