Millie Polimac

Millie is regularly instructed by local authorities in cases raising public law issues such as homelessness decisions, challenges to allocation schemes and other policies, as well as possession cases where public law defences are raised.

Millie has particular expertise in public law cases raising equality, human rights or EU law issues.  In 2019 she was appointed to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s panel of counsel.

Recent cases include:

• R (on the application of Parveen) v Redbridge LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 194 (sole counsel): Whether judge was correct to make no order as to costs following settlement of a judicial review claim, where no causal link between offer of accommodation and judicial review was established. The Court of Appeal gave further guidance about the correct approach in such cases, and in particular, on the meaning of ‘success’, referred to in M v Croydon [2012] EWCA Civ 595
• R (SH) v LB Waltham Forest [2019] EWHC 2160 (Admin) (sole counsel): Whether interim relief should be granted pending a final determination in a case concerning a victim of human trafficking.
• Aldwyck HA v Forward [2019] EWCA Civ 1334 (led by Nicholas Grundy QC): The extent of the application of the Public Sector Equality Duty in s.149 of the Equality Act 2010 in a possession claim brought on reasonableness grounds. The Court of Appeal held for the first time that where a breach of the PSED would make no difference it should not act as a defence to a claim.
• Alibkhiet v London Borough of Brent [2018] EWCA Civ 2742; [2019] H.L.R. 15 (led by Nicholas Grundy QC): Extent of the duty to give reasons for out of borough placements where an applicant does not qualify for in borough placement under the council’s policy.
• XPQ v Hammersmith and Fulham [2018] EWHC 1391 (HC); [2018] 4 WLR 102 (led by Nicholas Grundy QC): 5 day trial to establish whether the authority had breached its duties under the EU Anti-Trafficking Directive, Articles 3, 4, and 8 ECHR and/or was negligent when placing a homeless applicant in two sets of accommodation in discharge of their duties.
• Leach v St Albans [2018] EWCA Civ 1616 (sole counsel): whether there was a breach of natural justice to not inform the homeless applicant of the right to make representations at an oral hearing.

Millie is sought after in a wide range of landlord and tenant issues including leasehold, residential and commercial landlord and tenant disputes. She has experience of acting in trials of claims allocated to the fast track and multi-track.

Recent experience:

• Lloyds Bank v Leung– considering whether ss.36 AJA 1970 and s.8 AJA 1973 applied to an all-monies mortgage.
• Dabora Conway v LBWF– whether a sub-lease to a local authority who granted occupation rights to homelessness applicants was a business lease under Part II Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.
• Olofin v London Properties – various issues arising from an agreement to purchase a property and its subsequent repossession by mortgagee including beneficial ownership and trusts of land.
• HOI v W –representing a freeholder in a service charges claim and a counterclaim for adverse possession of loft space not forming part of the demise under a long lease.
• 4 Southall Court v Guraga– claim considering whether service and administration charges were due and reasonable, as well as whether a lease variation was valid.
• Representing the defendant in a fast-track claim for a breach of contract regarding the provision of architectural services in relation to a private property.
• Small claims trial for sums due under a deed granting a right of way but requiring the beneficiaries to pay costs of keeping the right of way in good repair.
• Advising in relation to an interim order to allow access and permit trading from jointly owned commercial premises.
• Advising in relation to a compulsory purchase order.
• Advising in relation to a proposed lease variation.
• Wills and probate disputes.
• Inheritance Act disputes.
• Party Walls.
• Boundary Disputes.

Recent experience in the higher courts:

• Watkins v AMSH [2019] Env. L.R. 2 (sole counsel): Whether proprietary interest needed to establish standing in bringing a private prosecution under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

Millie has extensive experience in the field of social housing, being regularly instructed in trials and appeals on behalf of local authorities.

Recent experience in the higher courts:

• R (on the application of Parveen) v Redbridge LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 194 (sole counsel): Whether judge was correct to make no order as to costs following settlement, where no causal link between offer of accommodation and judicial review was established.
• R (SH) v LB Waltham Forest [2019] EWHC 2618 (Admin) (sole counsel): Whether the main housing duty was properly discharged by two offers of private accommodation.
• R (SH) v LB Waltham Forest [2019] EWHC 2160 (Admin) (sole counsel): Whether interim relief should be granted pending a final determination in a case concerning a victim of human trafficking.
• Aldwyck HA v Forward [2019] EWCA Civ 1334 (led by Nicholas Grundy QC): The extent of the application of the PSED in a possession claim brought on reasonableness grounds.
• Alibkhiet v London Borough of Brent [2018] EWCA Civ 2742; [2019] H.L.R. 15 (led by Nicholas Grundy QC): Extent of the duty to give reasons for out of borough placements where an applicant does not qualify for in borough placement under the council’s policy.
• Watkins v AMSH [2019] Env. L.R. 2 (sole counsel): Whether proprietary interest needed to establish standing in bringing a private prosecution under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
• XPQ v Hammersmith and Fulham [2018] EWHC 1391 (HC); [2018] 4 WLR 102 (led by Nicholas Grundy QC): 5 day trial to establish whether the authority had breached its duties under the EU Anti-Trafficking Directive, Articles 3, 4, and 8 ECHR and/or was negligent when placing a homeless applicant in to sets of accommodation in discharge of their housing duties.
• Leach v St Albans [2018] EWCA Civ 1616 (sole counsel): whether there was a breach of natural justice to not inform homeless applicant of the right to make representations at an oral hearing

Other relevant experience:

Article 8 ECHR:

• London Borough of Lewisham v Mefemi and persons unknown– addressed the court on the application of Article 8 ECHR against trespassers in an application to stay an eviction. This case concerned the scope of Malik v Fassenfelt [2013] EWCA Civ 798.
• Hon v Odotuyo– Addressed the court on the application of Article 8 ECHR in proceedings against a private landlord.

Possession and injunctions:

• CAHA v Walters– successfully resisted the argument that the execution of the warrant should not be set aside for oppression. To read a report of this case click here.
• Islington v Summerston– one day fast-track trial seeking a final injunction in an anti-social behaviour case.

Tenancy deposit issues:

• Hon v Odotuyo– Possession proceedings concerning the correct steps a landlord in required to take to comply with s213 Housing Act 2004 (tenancy deposit schemes).

Millie is instructed by both companies and individuals in all areas of employment law. She has appeared in multi-day trials at the Employment Tribunal and also has experience of cases before the EAT and the Court of Appeal.

Recent experience:

At the Court of Appeal Millie worked on the following cases in the field of employment law

• Shrestha v Genesis Housing Association Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 94
• Kiani v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 776

Millie recently acted for the successful respondent in an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal in Odukoya v Hopkins (UKEAT/0251/16/DA).  The case involved the question of jurisdiction and time limits for claims brought under the Equality Act 2010.  The case can be found here.

She has experience of conducting multi day trials in employment tribunals.  Instructions include:

• A claim for unfair dismissal for whistleblowing;
• A claim for unfair dismissal and for disability discrimination related to absence by reason of illness;
• A constructive dismissal claim;
• A claim for unfair dismissal for gross misconduct;
• A claim for race and disability discrimination;
• A claim for unfair dismissal by reason of redundancy;
• Resisting a claim for unfair dismissal following an alleged TUPE transfer.

Millie accepts instructions in both pure immigration cases and in those involving business immigration issues.

She is a co-presenter of the MBL seminar entitled “An Introduction to Business Immigration” and lectures on this around the country.

At the Court of Appeal Millie has also been dealing with cases seeking permission to appeal following a refusal to grant leave to remain, as well as other applications for permission to appeal in the immigration field.

Recent experience:

While at the Court of Appeal Millie worked on the following cases in the field of immigration:

• TG and others v Director of Legal Aid Casework and the Lord Chancellor [2014] EWCA Civ 1622
• KI(Nigeria) v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 255
• Singh v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 630
• R. (on the application of B) v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 445

Recent instructions in the field of immigration include:

• The Queen (oao Ahmed) v SSHD (Upper Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber)- Acting for an applicant in an application for permission to apply for judicial review at the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Aslyum Chamber)
• AO (Nigeria) v SSHD (Court of Appeal)– representing the appellant in an oral hearing in the application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The case concerns the weight to be attached to s.117B(6) Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, as amended, in the context of Part 5A as a whole.
• The Queen (oao Tesslin Parker) v SSHD (Court of Appeal) – representing the appellant in an oral hearing in the application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The case concerns an application for British Citizenship as a former CUKC from Jamaica.

Recent advice in the field of immigration includes:

• Advising on the merits of making a further application for leave on Zambrano grounds
• Advising a business on a potential revocation of their sponsor licence following employment of a person under a Tier 2 visa
• Advising on the prospects of success of a fresh application by a Turkish national to join spouse in a case involving a history of deception by the applicant

“I was very impressed with how quickly she got to grips with the details and the legal issues and conducted the final hearing. She is clearly well organised and very analytical.”
Chambers and Partners 2022 

“She wins cases, her submissions are clear and concise, she knows the law and her delivery is great.”  
Chambers and Partners 2022 

‘Very well-organised and succinct arguments put forward, in writing and in oral submissions. Great knowledge of the area in which instructions are being sought.” 
Legal 500 2022 

“She is very good at explaining to the client and getting them to understand the tribunal, and she is also very good at homing in on the legal issues.”
Chambers & Partners 2021

“Millie’s strengths are being able to think on her feet and having a creative and logical way of resolving problems.”
The Legal 500 UK 2021

“She is extremely knowledgeable both with legislation and case law, and is clear and articulate in court.”
Chambers & Partners 2020

“She is very analytical and good at cases that raise novel points of law.”
Chambers & Partners 2020

University of Cambridge, LL.M
University of K.U. Leuven (Belgium), European law
King’s College London, LL.B

Scholarships:

Phoenicia Scholar, Bar European Group (2009)
JP Warner Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn (2007)
Graveson Prize for highest mark in Conflict of Laws examination, King’s College London (2006)
Lacey French Bursary, King’s College London (2006)
King’s College London/University of Bologna Study Scholarship in Human Rights (2005)

Articles:

• “Does a judge have to consider Article 8 in possession proceedings brought by a private landlord ” – case comment on McDonald v McDonald [2016] UKSC 28 which can be accessed here.
• “Court of Appeal gives further guidance on Article 8 in immigration cases: Singh and Khalid v SSHD [2015] EWCA Civ 74” –  please click here for the article.
• “When 3 became 1: the ECJ’s judgment in C-31/09 Bolbol” (2010) 9 European Law Reporter 303 – determining refugee status under Directive 2004/83.
• Contributor to the Westlaw Insight Encyclopedia on the following EU law topics:
  (1) Freedom of Movement for Workers
  (2) EU Citizenship
  (3) Principles of effectiveness and equivalence
  (4) Direct applicability

Seminars

Millie regularly gives lectures to professionals on EU law and is an Associate Researcher at the University of K.U. Leuven in Belgium. Recent lectures include:

• “The traditional dilemma around the preliminary reference question: obligation or possibility to refer?” EIPA annual conference on the recent CJEU jurisprudence (Dec 2013)

• “Broadening the scope of application of state liability and narrowing the exceptions”, EIPA annual conference on the recent CJEU jurisprudence (Dec 2012)

• “New horizons? The horizontal application of fundamental rights in the EU”, Society of Legal Scholars Annual Conference 2012 (Sep 2012)

• “The impact of EU Citizenship on national rules governing the form of entry of a person’s names in official documents”, EIPA annual conference on the recent CJEU jurisprudence (Dec 2011)

• “Legitimate Expectations”, BEG and ALBA Annual Conference “General principles of review in EU and domestic law”, fellow panellists: Laws LJ and Professor Forsyth (May 2011)

• “Fundamentals of EU law: Direct effect and Supremacy”, European Academy of Law, judicial training (April 2011)

Fluent French

Employment Law Association, Bar European Group, Administrative Law Bar Association, Social Housing Law Association.

Millie is also a member of the Free Representation Unit and the Bar Pro Bono Unit.

She sits on the Lincoln’s Inn European Law Committee. For more information please click here.

For Millie’s LinkedIn profile please click here.