Public housing tenants are celebrating a "landmark" victory after the full bench of the Northern Territory Supreme Court rejected a bid by the government to weaken language that required it to provide habitable housing.
Daniel Kelly from Australian Lawyers for Remote Aboriginal Rights said Friday's outcome set "a new legal standard" for all tenants in the NT.
"The Northern Territory government has been thwarted again in trying to lessen those obligations," he said.
All landlords in the NT, including the government, are now legally required to "give [tenants] some comfort and some basis for a decent life".
It is a landmark decision in an ongoing legal battle that began in 2016, when 70 public housing tenants in Santa Teresa, 85km south-east of Alice Springs, moved to sue the NT's Department of Housing over the condition of their homes.
Residents reported frequently losing access to electricity, working plumbing and hot water for months or, in some cases, years at a time.
One of the lead tenants in the case, Enid Young, was missing a back door on her property for five years.
The drawn-out legal battle saw the case move through the NT Civil and Administrative Tribunal to the Supreme Court, where, in 2019, a judge found that a "habitable" home should be "safe", but also "humane" and "reasonably comfortable".
Opens door for more communities
Friday's finding in favour of the tenants followed an attempt by the government early last year to have that language "wound back".
"The NT government has consistently argued that the obligation they owe to remote tenants is to provide them with a house that is safe, and only safe," Mr Kelly said.
"That argument was rejected by the Supreme Court and it's been rejected again today by the full court."
Mr Kelly said other Santa Teresa tenants would now be able to have their cases assessed against the new standard.
He said the case also opened the door for similar class actions in the NT's other remote communities.
"Hopefully this leads to other communities coming forward and enforcing their rights through the courts — those rights are now very clear.
Compensation to be determined
The full court finding was in response to the cases of two lead litigants: Enid Young and Mr Conway, who died before the case was resolved.
In 2019, a Supreme Court justice ordered Ms Young be compensated more than $10,000, instead of $100 as was originally decided upon by NTCAT, for having no back door on her house from 2010 until 2016.
Mr Kelly said questions of further compensation for her and for other members of the original litigation remained "unresolved".
While Friday's judgement dealt with the government's appeal of the 2019 decision, Mr Kelly's team has an appeal that will consider questions of compensation in the coming months.
