Click the case name for better results:

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

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

Ahmed v Leicester City Council: CA 27 Jun 2007

Judges: Arden LJ Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 843, [2008] HLR 6 Links: Bailii Statutes: Housing Act 1996 204 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – 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 … Continue reading Ahmed v Leicester City Council: CA 27 Jun 2007

James v Hertsmere Borough Council: CA 2 Apr 2020

This appeal concerns the scope of the jurisdiction of the county court when hearing a statutory appeal from a decision under s. 204 of the Housing Act 1996, and the lawfulness in this case of a contracted-out review decision under s. 202 of that Act. Judges: Lord Justice Peter Jackson Citations: [2020] EWCA Civ 489 … Continue reading James v Hertsmere Borough Council: CA 2 Apr 2020

Regina v Brent London Borough Council, ex parte O’Connor: QBD 1998

Tucker J said of section 204(2A) ‘ . . the time limit fixed by Parliament under the Housing Act 1996 was draconian, as some might think. It was certainly short and it gave no discretion to the judge either of this court or the county court to extend it.’ Judges: Tucker J Citations: (1998) 31 … Continue reading Regina v Brent London Borough Council, ex parte O’Connor: QBD 1998

Al Ahmed v London Borough of Tower Hamlets: CA 30 Jan 2020

‘This case concerns the approach to be adopted by the court towards the assessment of a ‘good reason’ for delay in bringing an appeal under s.204 of the Housing Act 1996 (‘the 1996 Act’) against an adverse review decision under the homelessness provisions of that Act, in circumstances where the reason put forward for the … Continue reading Al Ahmed v London Borough of Tower Hamlets: CA 30 Jan 2020

Goodger v London Borough of Ealing: CA 23 Apr 2002

The claimant had sought housing as a homeless person. The authority rejected his claim saying that he was intentionally homeless, having lost his previous accomodation having grown cannabis there breaching his tenancy. The authority appealed an order which said it had breached natural justice by not providing its file for inspection until a few days … Continue reading Goodger v London Borough of Ealing: CA 23 Apr 2002

Berhane v Lambeth: QBD 25 Jul 2007

Appeal against grant of adjournment of possession action whilst defendant abided by the terms of the order. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2007] EWHC 2702 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Housing Act 1996 204 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Housing Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.263251

Eston Bernard v London Borough of Enfield: CA 4 Dec 2001

The applicant sought review of a decision by the local authority that he was intentionally homeless through a failure to pay his rent. He appealed a rejection of leave to appeal, and his appeal was with regard to the adequacy of the reasons given by the local authority for its decision. The claimant said he … Continue reading Eston Bernard v London Borough of Enfield: CA 4 Dec 2001

London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Runa Begum: CA 6 Mar 2002

The applicant had applied for rehousing as a homeless person. She was offered interim accommodation but refused it. Her case was reviewed, and her reasons rejected. She claimed the procedure was unfair, in that the authority was looking at decisions on disputed facts, and reviewing its own decisions on those facts. It was not acting … Continue reading London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Runa Begum: CA 6 Mar 2002

London Borough of Newham v Adan: CA 14 Dec 2001

The applicant was a Dutch national. She appealed for housing as a homeless person. The local authority, after review found her not to have a settled intention to stay in England. She appealed, to the County Court, and succeeded, and the Authority now appealed. Held: The County Court in reviewing such decisions under the section, … Continue reading London Borough of Newham v Adan: CA 14 Dec 2001

Van Aken v Camden London Borough Council: CA 11 Oct 2002

The appellant sought to appeal a review of his application for housing. The appeal was lodged at court after close of business on the last day of the statutory time limit. The court decided it was delivered out of time. Held: The Act required the appeal to be delivered. That denoted a unilateral act, not … Continue reading Van Aken v Camden London Borough Council: CA 11 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

Ali v Birmingham City Council: CA 7 Nov 2008

The Council said that it had discharged its duty to house the claimants after they had refused an offer of accommodation, and that decision had been reviewed. The claimant denied receiving a notice under the procedure. The court was asked whether the decision in Runa Begum was to be interpreted in the light of Tsfayo. … Continue reading Ali v Birmingham City Council: CA 7 Nov 2008

Bhatia Best Ltd v Lord Chancellor: QBD 17 Mar 2014

The court was asked whether, under its contract with the Lord Chancellor, a firm of solicitors, is entitled to receive civil legal aid funding for its work while acting for clients in appeals against homelessness decisions under section 204 of the 1996 Act. Silber J [2014] EWHC 746 (QB) Bailii Housing Act 1996 204 England … Continue reading Bhatia Best Ltd v Lord Chancellor: QBD 17 Mar 2014

Runa Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (First Secretary of State intervening): HL 13 Feb 2003

The appellant challenged the procedure for reviewing a decision made as to the suitability of accomodation offered to her after the respondent had accepted her as being homeless. The procedure involved a review by an officer of the council, with an appeal to the County Court on a point of law. Held: The decision was … Continue reading Runa Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (First Secretary of State intervening): HL 13 Feb 2003

Hysaj and Others, Regina (On The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 26 Nov 2015

Each of the three applicamts having been found to have lied in order to obtain British Nationality, now appealed against a decision that they were not in fact Britsh citizens. Judges: Kitchin, Floyd, Sales LJJ Citations: [2015] EWCA Civ 1195, [2015] WLR(D) 482, [2016] 1 WLR 673 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: Immigration Act 1971 1(2) … Continue reading Hysaj and Others, Regina (On The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 26 Nov 2015

F v Birmingham City Council: CA 2 Nov 2006

The applicant sought housing as a homeless person with her children. The authority found her in priority need, but intentionally homeless. Her appeal against the adverse review failed, and she appealed again. She had given up a council flat and had moved into premises which she found she could not afford and lost. She said … Continue reading F v Birmingham City Council: CA 2 Nov 2006

Ali v Lord Mayor and Citizens of City of Westminster: CA 24 Jul 1998

Whether the County Court has jurisdiction to grant an interlocutory injunction requiring a local authority to provide accommodation for a person who is proceeding with an appeal under s 204 of the Housing Act 1996 against a review decision made under s 202 of the Act. Citations: [1998] EWCA Civ 1288, [1999] 1 WLR 384 … Continue reading Ali v Lord Mayor and Citizens of City of Westminster: CA 24 Jul 1998

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

Emambee v London Borough of Islington: QBD 25 Oct 2019

Judges: Mr Justice Stewart Citations: [2019] EWHC 2835 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Al Ahmed v London Borough of Tower Hamlets CA 30-Jan-2020 ‘This case concerns the approach to be adopted by the court towards the assessment of a ‘good reason’ for delay in bringing an appeal under s.204 … Continue reading Emambee v London Borough of Islington: QBD 25 Oct 2019

Western Fish Products Ltd v Penwith District Council and Another: CA 22 May 1978

Estoppel Cannot Oust Statutory Discretion The plaintiff had been refused planning permission for a factory. The refusals were followed by the issue of Enforcement Notices and Stop Notices. The plaintiff said that they had been given re-assurances upon which they had relied. Held: The appeal failed. The court tried to reconcile invocations of estoppel with … Continue reading Western Fish Products Ltd v Penwith District Council and Another: CA 22 May 1978

Norris v Milton Keynes Council: CA 27 Jan 2010

Renewed application for permission to appeal against an order dismissing an appeal under section 204 of the Housing Act 1996 against the decision of a review officer to the effect that accommodation at Milton Keynes that had been offered to her under the Council’s Housing Act duties was suitable. Judges: Rimer LJ Citations: [2010] EWCA … Continue reading Norris v Milton Keynes Council: CA 27 Jan 2010

Carmichael and Another v National Power Plc: HL 24 Jun 1999

Tour guides were engaged to act ‘on a casual as required basis’. The guides later claimed to be employees and therefore entitled by statute to a written statement of their terms of employment. Their case was that an exchange of correspondence between the parties in March 1989 constituted a contract, which was to be classified … Continue reading Carmichael and Another v National Power Plc: HL 24 Jun 1999

Birmingham City Council v Qasim and Others: CA 20 Oct 2009

The council argued that the defendant was not a tenant granted to him as a secure tenancy since he had not been granted the tenancy in accordance with its policies. An employee had manipulated the Council’s system to grant tenancies to bypass the controls. There was no evidence of this having been done for payment. … Continue reading Birmingham City Council v Qasim and Others: CA 20 Oct 2009

MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State and Another: SC 22 Feb 2017

Challenge to rules requiring certain minimum levels of income (Minimum Income Requirement – MIR) for allowing entry for non-EEA spouse. Held: The challenges udder the Human Rights Act to the Rules themselves failed. Nor did any separate issue of discrimination arise under article 14. However, the appendix with instructions for entry clearance officers considering the … Continue reading MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State and Another: SC 22 Feb 2017

Knight v Vale Royal Borough Council: CA 31 Jul 2003

The claimant challenged a decision of the authority that she had made herself intentionally homeless.She had gone to a refuge, then to stay with her mother. She had been found to be intentionally homeless. She then found a shorthold tenancy. When that was coming to an end the authority notified her that she remained intentionally … Continue reading Knight v Vale Royal Borough Council: CA 31 Jul 2003

London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames v Kubicek: QBD 23 Nov 2012

This appeal raises an issue as to when, if ever, it is permissible for a county court hearing an appeal under section 204 of the Housing Act 1996 on ‘any point of law’ arising from a review decision made by a local housing authority in a homelessness case to receive evidence on and decide a … Continue reading London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames v Kubicek: QBD 23 Nov 2012

C v London Borough of Lewisham: CA 4 Jul 2003

The applicant lost her flat and had been refused emergency housing for herself and her child. She had a very troubled history with severe emotional trauma, and was disorganised. He application was refused on the ground of her having become intentionally homeless. The authority refused to extend her time to request a review. She now … Continue reading C v London Borough of Lewisham: CA 4 Jul 2003

Sambotin, Regina (on The Application of) v The London Borough of Brent: CA 31 Jul 2018

Reasons for dismissal of claim – whether a local housing authority can reconsider its determination of an applicant’s eligibility for assistance under Part VII of the 1996 Act after it has made a ‘local connection’ referral to another authority. Citations: [2018] EWCA Civ 1826 Links: Bailii Statutes: Housing Act 1996 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Housing … Continue reading Sambotin, Regina (on The Application of) v The London Borough of Brent: CA 31 Jul 2018

Trindade v London Borough of Hackney: CA 6 Jul 2017

Appeal against a decision dismissing an appeal brought by the appellant under section 204 of the 1996 Act against an assessment made by the Council upon review under section 202 of the 1996 Act. The Council’s assessment in relation to establishing the extent of the duties it owed the appellant with respect to provision of … Continue reading Trindade v London Borough of Hackney: CA 6 Jul 2017

Petrovic v Austria: ECHR 27 Mar 1998

The applicant was refused a grant of parental leave allowance in 1989. At that time parental leave allowance was available only to mothers. The applicant complained that this violated article 14 taken together with article 8. Held: The application was dismissed. the court noted that, as society moved towards a more equal sharing of responsibilities … Continue reading Petrovic v Austria: ECHR 27 Mar 1998

W v London Borough of Haringey: Misc 17 Feb 2016

Central London County Court – appeal by W under s. 204 of the Housing Act 1996 against the decision on review by the respondent local housing authority (‘Haringey’), upholding an earlier decision that he was not within a category of persons who are in ‘a priority need for accommodation’, as specified in s. 189(1) of … Continue reading W v London Borough of Haringey: Misc 17 Feb 2016

Taiwo and Another v Olaigbe and Others: SC 22 Jun 2016

The claimants had been brought here illegally to act as servants for the defendants. They were taken advantage of and abused. They made several claims, but now appealed against rejection of their claims for discrimination. The court was asked whether discrimination because of, or on grounds of, immigration status amounts to discrimination because of, or … Continue reading Taiwo and Another v Olaigbe and Others: SC 22 Jun 2016

Barrett, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Council: Admn 28 Jul 2015

The Claimant challenged the Defendant’s decisions to refuse to exercise its discretion under section 188(3) of the Housing Act to secure that accommodation is available to the Claimant pending the outcome of its review of her application for assistance under Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996. John Bowers QC [2015] EWHC 2515 (Admin) Bailii … Continue reading Barrett, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Council: Admn 28 Jul 2015

Birmingham City Council v Balog: CA 12 Dec 2013

The Council appealed against a decision allowing the appeal of the respondent under the 1996 Act against its review decision which had upheld its original decision that Mr Balog was intentionally homeless within the meaning of s.191 of the 1996 Act. Sullivan, Kitchin, Briggs LJJ [2013] EWCA Civ 1582 Bailii Housing Act 1996 191 204 … Continue reading Birmingham City Council v Balog: CA 12 Dec 2013

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

Begum (Nipa) v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council: CA 1 Nov 1999

The fact that the accommodation found to be available to the applicant for housing was in Bangladesh did not make it unavailable in law. The subsections must be read separately. Accommodation could be available to the applicant even though she could not afford to travel to it. The power of the County Court to hear … Continue reading Begum (Nipa) v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council: CA 1 Nov 1999

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

law index

Our law-index is a substantial selection from our database. Cases here are restricted in number by date and lack the additional facilities formerly available within lawindexpro. Please do enjoy this free version of the lawindex. Case law does not ‘belong’ to lawyers. Judgments are made up of words which can be read and understood (if … Continue reading law index