Click the case name for better results:

Issa (Suing By her Next Friend and Father Issa) and Issa (Suing By her Next Friend and Father Issa) v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Hackney: CA 19 Nov 1996

A Local Authority found guilty of a statutory nuisance is not thereby liable for a civil damages suit. Citations: Times 26-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 998, [1997] 1 WLR 956, (1997) 29 HLR 640, [1997] Env LR 157 Links: Bailii Statutes: Public Health Act 1936 Part II (Nuisance etc) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – … Continue reading Issa (Suing By her Next Friend and Father Issa) and Issa (Suing By her Next Friend and Father Issa) v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Hackney: CA 19 Nov 1996

Medina Housing Association v Case: CA 16 Dec 2002

The claimant had obtained an order for possession against the defendant for her repeated anti-social behaviour. The court granted in addition to the possession order an injunction restraining the defendant from coming near the premises for a further five years. Held: The jurisdiction to make such an injunction lasted only as long as did the … Continue reading Medina Housing Association v Case: CA 16 Dec 2002

Warsame and Warsame v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 25 Jun 1999

The appellants refused the authority’s offer of accommodation under Part VI of the 1996 Act, saying it was not suitable. After the authority had informed them that if they did not accept the offer, the authority’s duty to house them would cease, requested a review under section 202(1)(b) of the authority’s decision that its duty … Continue reading Warsame and Warsame v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 25 Jun 1999

Belvedere Court Management Ltd v Frogmore Developments Ltd: CA 24 Oct 1995

Landlords had sold flats to Frogmore without serving a section 5 notice under the 1987 Act. Prior to receipt of a purchase notice, Frogmore granted certain leases in the block of flats to another party. Held: The agreements were upheld, and were not shams even though they had been intended to work around the 1987 … Continue reading Belvedere Court Management Ltd v Frogmore Developments Ltd: CA 24 Oct 1995

London Borough of Hamlets v Al Ahmed: QBD 26 Mar 2019

The respondent had requested a review of his housing priority need. He had applied to the Authority under the homelessness provisions of the 1996 Act, the Council decided that he was not in priority need. The solicitors then acting for him requested a review of that decision. The decision on the review / upheld the … Continue reading London Borough of Hamlets v Al Ahmed: QBD 26 Mar 2019

Bankers Trust Company v Namdar and Namdar: CA 14 Feb 1997

The bank sought repayment of its loan and possession of the defendants’ property. The second defendant said that the charge had only her forged signature. Held: Non-compliance with section 2 of the 1989 Act does not make a bargain illegal, and therefore does not remove the possibility of an argument based upon estoppel. Judges: Peter … Continue reading Bankers Trust Company v Namdar and Namdar: CA 14 Feb 1997

Regina (on the application of) Awua v Brent London Borough Council: HL 6 Jul 1995

Tower Hamlets, having determined the applicant to be homeless, in priority need and not intentionally homeless. After she occupied temporary accomodation she was offered an alternative being told it was the council’s policy only to make one such offer. Having rejected it as unsuitable, she was given notice to quit the temporary accomodation. She then … Continue reading Regina (on the application of) Awua v Brent London Borough Council: HL 6 Jul 1995

Uber Bv and Others v Aslam and Others: CA 19 Dec 2018

Uber drivers are workers The claimant Uber drivers sought the status of workers, allowing them to claim the associated statutory employment benefits. The company now appealed from a finding that they were workers. Held: The appeal failed (Underhill LJ dissenting) The drivers accepted the control of tee Uber app: ‘Even if drivers are not obliged … Continue reading Uber Bv and Others v Aslam and Others: CA 19 Dec 2018

In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation): CA 22 Sep 2000

Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The parents, devout Roman Catholics, resisted. Held: The parents’ views were subject to the overriding … Continue reading In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation): CA 22 Sep 2000

Jelson Ltd v Derby City Council: ChD 30 Jun 1999

Agreements under the planning acts remained subject to the general law requiring formalities for contracts for the sale of land. Where two landowners had an understanding as to the expectations for the division of responsibility for provision of affordable housing between their respective plots, one could not be obliged to continue where the contract was … Continue reading Jelson Ltd v Derby City Council: ChD 30 Jun 1999

M, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham: HL 27 Feb 2008

M, a girl aged 16 had become estranged from her mother, and sought housing assistance. She was not referred to the authority’s children’s services, and was not housed. The House examined the duties of local authorities under the section towards children aged 16 and 17 without support from their families. The 1989 Act referred to … Continue reading M, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham: HL 27 Feb 2008

Kilcarne Holdings Ltd v Targetfollow (Birmingham) Ltd, Targetfollow Group Ltd: ChD 9 Nov 2004

The defendant entered into an agreement for lease, incurring substantial obligations. When it could not meet them it sought assistance from the claimant, who now claimed to have an interest in a joint venture. The draft documentation originally suggested a loan, but then changed. Disagreements persisted after completion. Held: There was insufficient agreement to constitute … Continue reading Kilcarne Holdings Ltd v Targetfollow (Birmingham) Ltd, Targetfollow Group Ltd: ChD 9 Nov 2004

Din (Taj) v Wandsworth London Borough Council: HL 26 Nov 1981

The appellants had applied for emergency housing as homeless persons, anticipating loss of their secure accomodation after falling into arrears. The Council reject their application, but a County Court quashed that decision. The Court of Appeal re-instated it, and the applicants now appealed again. The applicants had first sought advice from the council and had … Continue reading Din (Taj) v Wandsworth London Borough Council: HL 26 Nov 1981

Elitestone Ltd v Morris and Another: HL 1 May 1997

The plaintiff acquired land on which 27 chalets were erected. They served notice to quit so that the site could be developed. The defendants argued that they had residential tenancies with protection under the Rent Act 1977. Held: The tenants’ appeals succeeded. A built structure becomes part of the land and itself real property, according … Continue reading Elitestone Ltd v Morris and Another: HL 1 May 1997

Regina v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Newham (No 3) ex parte Ojuri: Admn 9 Jul 1998

When making decisions about the form of interim housing to be provided under the homelessness provisions, the authority should pay heed to the statutory Code of Practice. Bed and breakfast accommodation was wrong for a family with children. Judges: Collins J Citations: Times 29-Aug-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 730, 31 HLR 452, (1999) 31 HLR 452 … Continue reading Regina v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Newham (No 3) ex parte Ojuri: Admn 9 Jul 1998

Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua: HL 6 Jul 1995

The term ‘Accommodation’ in the Act was to be read to include short term lettings, and was not to be restricted to secure accommodation, and the loss of such accommodation can be counted as intentional homelessness. If a person who had been provided with accommodation in accordance with section 65(2) of the 1985 Act was … Continue reading Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua: HL 6 Jul 1995

Enfield London Borough Council v B (A Minor) and Another: CA 2 Sep 1999

In order to grant an injunction under the section, a person sought to be protected had to have some real nexus or connection with the residential premises involved. A connection with the area in general was insufficient. A milkman visiting residential premises might be protected, but a housing officer working in the area had no … Continue reading Enfield London Borough Council v B (A Minor) and Another: CA 2 Sep 1999

Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office: HL 24 Jul 1991

The prisoner challenged the decision to place him in segregation under Prison Rule 43. Under rule 43(1) the initial power to segregate was given to ‘the governor’. The case arose from the fact that the governor of one prison had purported to authorise the segregation of a prisoner on his arrival at another prison to … Continue reading Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office: HL 24 Jul 1991

Quick v Taff Ely Borough Council: CA 1986

Because of fungus, mould growth and dampness, the tenant’s council house was virtually unfit for human habitation in the winter when the condensation was at its worst. Section 32(1) of the 1961 Act implied in the tenancy a covenant by the council to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling-house. Section 32(3) … Continue reading Quick v Taff Ely Borough Council: CA 1986

Samuels v Birmingham City Council: SC 12 Jun 2019

The appellant had been provided with emergency accommodation after losing her assured shorthold tenancy, but the court was now asked ‘whether the council adopted the correct approach in determining that the accommodation was ‘affordable’ for those purposes.’ Held: Her appeal was granted. The 1996 Order requires the authority to take into account all sources of … Continue reading Samuels v Birmingham City Council: SC 12 Jun 2019

Regina v Waveney City Council, ex parte Bowers: CA 25 May 1982

The applicant was an alcoholic and had in 1980 been hit by a motor vehicle and suffered a severe head injury. He sought judicial review of the respondent’s failure to house him. Held: The appeal was allowed: ‘The question we have to consider is whether or not the applicant is vulnerable and secondly whether the … Continue reading Regina v Waveney City Council, ex parte Bowers: CA 25 May 1982

X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (A Minor) and Another v Newham London Borough Council; Etc: HL 29 Jun 1995

Liability in Damages on Statute Breach to be Clear Damages were to be awarded against a Local Authority for breach of statutory duty in a care case only if the statute was clear that damages were capable of being awarded. in the ordinary case a breach of statutory duty does not, by itself, give rise … Continue reading X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (A Minor) and Another v Newham London Borough Council; Etc: HL 29 Jun 1995

ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 1 Feb 2011

The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return with her. Held: The mother’s appeal succeeded. The court had to consider the … Continue reading ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 1 Feb 2011

Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006

In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the recovery of possession interfered with their right respect for their family … Continue reading Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006

Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999

The applicant had soft tissue injuries around the spine as a consequence of a back injury at work. He was absent from work for a long time as a result of his injuries, and he was eventually dismissed when his medical advisers could provide no clear idea of when it would be possible for him … Continue reading Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999

McNerny v London Borough of Lambeth: CA 1988

The scale of the dampness which had to be endured by a tenant led to constant colds and minor ailments being suffered by the plaintiff and her children who had to live in those unhealthy conditions. Held: The legislature had ‘conspicuously refrained’ from updating the statutory rent limit and it was therefore not for the … Continue reading McNerny v London Borough of Lambeth: CA 1988

Alexander and Hatherley v Bridgen Enterprises Ltd: EAT 12 Apr 2006

The company made selections for redundancy, but failed to give the appellants information about how the scoring system had resulted in the figures allocated. The calculations left their representative unable to challenge them on appeal. The procedure adopted did not follow the statutory rules, but the tribunal had found the dismissals to be fair. The … Continue reading Alexander and Hatherley v Bridgen Enterprises Ltd: EAT 12 Apr 2006

London and Clydeside Estates v Aberdeen District Council: HL 8 Nov 1979

Identifying ‘maandatory’ and ‘regulatory’ The appellants had sought a Certificate of Alternative Development. The certificate provided was defective in that it did not notify the appellants, as required, of their right to appeal. Their appeal out of time was refused. Held: The House considered the consequences of a failure to comply with a procedural requirement, … Continue reading London and Clydeside Estates v Aberdeen District Council: HL 8 Nov 1979

Day and Another v Hosebay Ltd: SC 10 Oct 2012

The Court considered the provisions for leasehold enfranchisement now that the residence requirement had been removed by the 2002 Act, and in particular the extent to which, at all, it had allowed enfranchisement to be available to commercial buildings. The properties raised two issues: (i) Were the buildings ‘designed or adapted for living in’? And … Continue reading Day and Another v Hosebay Ltd: SC 10 Oct 2012

Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy. Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law because it is the antithesis of fairness. It brings the law … Continue reading Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

Bubb v London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 9 Nov 2011

The appellant had sought housing assistance. She had been offered accomodation but refused it as unreasonable. The authority declined further assistance. She now appealed against the refusal of the county court judge to set aside the decision against her on review. Held: Her appeal failed. The task of the county court judge was to see … Continue reading Bubb v London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 9 Nov 2011

Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher and Others: SC 27 Jul 2011

Car Cleaning nil-hours Contractors were Workers The company contracted with the claimants to work cleaning cars. The company appealed against a finding that contrary to the explicit provisions of the contracts, they were workers within the Regulations and entitled to holiday pay and associated benefits. The contracts were ‘nil hours’ contracts neither requiring nor entitling … Continue reading Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher and Others: SC 27 Jul 2011

ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham: SC 12 Nov 2014

The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under Part VII of the 1996 Act, and (ii) whether a public authority, which … Continue reading ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham: SC 12 Nov 2014

Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening): SC 30 Jun 2010

The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2. Held: The SSD’s appeal succeeded. ‘jurisdiction’ within the meaning of Article … Continue reading Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening): SC 30 Jun 2010

Ravichandran and Another v London Borough of Lewisham: CA 2 Jul 2010

The claimant appealed against an order confirming a review of the decision that the local authority owed no futher duty to her under section 193. She had rejected the house offered as unsuitable for medical reasons. Held: The tenant’s appeal succeeded. The offer being of a permanent home, ‘Unless bound by authority to reach a … Continue reading Ravichandran and Another v London Borough of Lewisham: CA 2 Jul 2010

Yaxley v Gotts and Another: CA 24 Jun 1999

Oral Agreement Creating Proprietory Estoppel The defendant offered to give to the Plaintiff, a builder, the ground floor of a property in return for converting the house, and then managing it. They were friends, and the oral offer was accepted. The property was then actually bought in the name of the first defendant, the second … Continue reading Yaxley v Gotts and Another: CA 24 Jun 1999