Don’t mention slavery!
Don’t mention slavery or it’ll cost you. For Paul Holdsworth, a Lake Windermere boatmaster, the cost was his job. Holdsworth “had worked for Cruises for 10 years, but quit in “disgust” after employees were banned from making reference to slavery in their commentaries” (Mohdin, 2023).
For a Black Midland Heart tenant, the cost was liability for his landlord’s legal expenses and an injunction.
The tenant had objected to the landlord’s in-house solicitor’s, Hannah Boyd, reference to “legal tool Midland Heart has elected to utilise” to correct what [she] regards as the unacceptable behaviour of the descendant of slaves.”
“The mutilation of limbs with cutlasses, hanging by rope, the cutting out of tongues and thrashing were once “legal tool” used by white people to control what they regarded as the unacceptable behaviour of black people”, the tenant told Boyd.
Boyd alleged the tenant’s references to slavery was “unacceptable” “offensive language”. It caused her “much nuisance and annoyance”. His conduct was anti-social behaviour. Furthermore, it breached the tenancy agreement, which has a rule against tenants causing “nuisance or annoyance” to Midland Heart staffs and others.
Midland Heart applied to a court for and got an anti-social behaviour injunction to prevent the tenant repeating the “offensive language”.
Midland Heart is a Birmingham based social landlord. “Birmingham’s huge gun-manufacturing sector was also involved, with firearms sold and used to help capture and subdue slaves.” (Yannielli, 2021)
Nine years after the court ordered the tenant to pay its legal costs, in April 2023 Midland Heart informed him it “will look to assert its right to commence enforcement action”. The tenant must pay Midland Heart’s costs or it will start proceedings to force him to pay.
It is doubtful Midland Heart has a legal right to start enforcement proceedings. Section 24 (1) of the Limitation Act 1980 says: “An action shall not be brought upon any judgment after the expiration of six years from the date on which the judgment became enforceable”.
Nevertheless, the tenant will now have to pay solicitors to defend Midland Heart’s enforcement proceedings.
The tenant has already suffered great financial loss defending the ASBI. However, as Paul Holdsworth rightly said, he is not going to be “complicit” in “censoring history”. So said I.
Please email me information about the legality of Midland Heart’s enforcement action.