Click the case name for better results:

Cadogan v McGirk: CA 25 Apr 1996

The court considered whether the 1993 Act should be construed as expropriatory legislation and therefore was to be read strictly. Held: The Court rejected the submission that the relevant provisions must be strictly construed because the 1993 Act was expropriatory in nature. Millet LJ said: ‘It would, in my opinion, be wrong to disregard the … Continue reading Cadogan v McGirk: CA 25 Apr 1996

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

Akinbolu v Hackney London Borough Council: CA 13 May 1996

The fact that a secure tenant was an illegal and an overstaying immigrant and therefore should not have been granted a tenancy, gave no right to the council as landlord summarily to evict him. Citations: Gazette 22-May-1996, Times 13-May-1996, (1996) 29 HLR 259 Statutes: Housing Act 1985 81 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited … Continue reading Akinbolu v Hackney London Borough Council: CA 13 May 1996

Guinan v Enfield London Borough Council: CA 1996

The landlord council and tenant claiming his right to buy disputed the reasonableness of terms proposed by the council for inclusion in the lease. The tenant served a RTB6 notice and the landlord served a RTB7 Counter notice relying on the reasonableness of the terms proposed. The tenant served a RTB8 operative notice of delay … Continue reading Guinan v Enfield London Borough Council: CA 1996

Marath and Another v MacGillivray: CA 5 Feb 1996

A landlord’s notice to the effect that ‘3 month’s rent due’ was a sufficiently precise demand to allow the tenant to know the nature of his default, and the notice was valid. the relevant notice said: ‘Signed: RM If signed by agent, name and address of agent: Acting Agent RM’ with the address. This notice … Continue reading Marath and Another v MacGillivray: CA 5 Feb 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

AMEC Building Limited and Squibb and Davies Limited v London Borough of Camden: Admn 19 Jul 1996

Citations: [1996] EWHC Admin 41 Statutes: Environmental Protection Act 1990 80(4), Control of Pollution Act 1974 60(8) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – A Lambert Flat Management Ltd v Lomas 1981 The court considered the relationship between the appeals procedure provided for by the regulations and the ‘reasonable excuse for non-compliance’ provisions in s.58(1)(4) … Continue reading AMEC Building Limited and Squibb and Davies Limited v London Borough of Camden: Admn 19 Jul 1996

Moat Housing Group-South Ltd v Harris and Another: CA 16 Mar 2005

The defendant family was served without notice with an anti-social behaviour order ordering them to leave their home immediately, and making other very substantial restrictions. The evidence in large part related to other people entirely. Held: To grant an injunction without notice is to grant an exceptional remedy. As to hearsay evidence: ‘ the experience … Continue reading Moat Housing Group-South Ltd v Harris and Another: CA 16 Mar 2005

Collins (Contractors) Ltd v Baltic Quay Management (1994) Ltd: CA 7 Dec 2004

The claimant sought payment under its invoice for construction works. The contractor gave notice of its intention to withhold payment, and then also sought to refer the matter to arbitration. The claimant said that the notice had prevented the reference, and appealed a stay pending the arbitration. Held: The appeal failed. There was nothing in … Continue reading Collins (Contractors) Ltd v Baltic Quay Management (1994) Ltd: CA 7 Dec 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

Smart v Sheffield City Council: Central Sunderland Housing Company Limited v Wilson: CA 25 Jan 2002

Each tenant had become unintentionally homeless, and was granted a non-secure tenancy of accommodation under section 193. Complaints of nuisance were received from neighbours. Possession orders were obtained and now challenged under the Human Rights Act. The service of the original notice to quit, engaged the Human Rights Act, but the action taken was lawful … Continue reading Smart v Sheffield City Council: Central Sunderland Housing Company Limited v Wilson: CA 25 Jan 2002

Greenwich London Borough Council v Regan: CA 31 Jan 1996

The authority had taken possession proceedings against the secure tenant for non-payment of rent, and obtained an order, suspended on condition as to payments. He again fell into arrears, and the authority made a further agreement. They now sought issue of a warrant, and the tenant argued that a new possession was required, saying that … Continue reading Greenwich London Borough Council v Regan: CA 31 Jan 1996

Regina v Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Ex Parte Kihara; Similar: CA 25 Jun 1996

Four asylum seekers had been deprived of benefits, and left destitute. They had sought housing assistance from the authority, claiming that the complete absence of resources left to them was an ‘other special reason’ leaving them vulnerable within s59. Held: Such destitution was capable of being a reason within the Act, and the appeal against … Continue reading Regina v Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Ex Parte Kihara; Similar: CA 25 Jun 1996

Greenwich Healthcare National Health Service Trust v London and Quadrant Housing Trust and Others: ChD 11 Jun 1998

The plaintiff had acquired land to build a hospital, which would require re-alignment of a link road, over which the defendants had rights of way. The land was also subject to a restrictive covenant in favour of the defendants. The defendants did not object, and the re-alignment of the right of way would improve the … Continue reading Greenwich Healthcare National Health Service Trust v London and Quadrant Housing Trust and Others: ChD 11 Jun 1998

Regina v Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council Ex Parte Kihara; Regina v Similar: QBD 1 May 1996

The words ‘other special reason’ for housing need within the section are to be to be read narrowly. The section was to be read as a whole and was not indended to cover impecuniosity through the denial of benefits. Citations: Times 01-May-1996 Statutes: Housing Act 1985 59(1) Cited by: Appeal from – Regina v Kensington … Continue reading Regina v Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council Ex Parte Kihara; Regina v Similar: QBD 1 May 1996

Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd: HL 28 Oct 1999

Same Sex Paartner to Inherit as Family Member The claimant had lived with the original tenant in a stable and long standing homosexual relationship at the deceased’s flat. After the tenant’s death he sought a statutory tenancy as a spouse of the deceased. The Act had been extended to include as a spouse someone living … Continue reading Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd: HL 28 Oct 1999

Knowsley Housing Trust v White; Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington; Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association: HL 10 Dec 2008

The House considered situations where a secure or assured tenancy had been made subject to a suspended possession order and where despite the tenant failing to comply with the conditions, he had been allowed to continue in occupation. Held: Mrs White remained an assured tenant despite the continued suspended possession order. Mr Porter was entitled … Continue reading Knowsley Housing Trust v White; Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington; Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association: HL 10 Dec 2008

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

69 Marina, St Leonards-On-Sea, Freeholders of v Oram and Another: CA 8 Nov 2011

The parties disputed the liability on lessees to contribute to a service charge for maintenance of common parts of the building. The six tenants covenanted to pay a proper proportion of the landlord’s costs of meeting his repair obligations. The landlord executed repair after a water leak. Two tenants argued that the cost was too … Continue reading 69 Marina, St Leonards-On-Sea, Freeholders of v Oram and Another: CA 8 Nov 2011

Forcelux Ltd v Binnie: CA 21 Oct 2009

Forcelux and Mr Binnie were the landlord and tenant of a flat in Lincoln. Under the lease, the tenant was obliged to pay ground rent and other charges. The lease contained a forfeiture provision in the event of non-payment of rent or charges. Mr Binnie fell into arrears and Forcelux obtained a default judgment against … Continue reading Forcelux Ltd v Binnie: CA 21 Oct 2009

Ahmad, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Newham: Admn 11 Sep 2007

The claimant challenged the council’s policy for allocating council houses. The policy would allocate applicants to a class, and once a property was available to that class, it was given to the person longest on the list within that class. Judges: Nicholas Blake QC Citations: [2007] EWHC 2332 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Housing Act 1996 … Continue reading Ahmad, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Newham: Admn 11 Sep 2007

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

Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Ermakov: CA 14 Nov 1995

The applicant, having moved here from Greece, applied for emergency housing. The Council received no reply to its requests for corroboration sent to Greece. Housing was refused, but the officer later suggested that the real reason was that the applicant had accommodation available in Greece. The court considered an affidavit on behalf of the decision-maker … Continue reading Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Ermakov: CA 14 Nov 1995

C (A Minor) v Hackney London Borough Council: CA 10 Nov 1995

The mother had claimed in damages for the injuries to her health from the landlord authority’s failure to repair. Her child then brought a subsequent action in respect of his own injuries. The authority claimed the action should be stopped as res judicata. Held: The child’s injuries from bad housing were a separate claim from … Continue reading C (A Minor) v Hackney London Borough Council: CA 10 Nov 1995

First Real Estates (UK) Ltd v Birmingham City Council: Admn 1 May 2009

One of the issues presented by the present case is that of determining whether Birmingham City Council, ‘the Council’, was exercising a public function when deciding to terminate what it described as its arrangements with First Real Estates (UK) Limited, ‘FRE’, for the provision of temporary accommodation for those whom the Council was obliged to … Continue reading First Real Estates (UK) Ltd v Birmingham City Council: Admn 1 May 2009

Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and others: HL 24 May 2006

Application had been made to register as a town or village green an area of land which was largely a boggy marsh. The local authority resisted the application wanting to use the land instead for housing. It then rejected advice it received from a non-statutory enquiry, and sought a declaration from the court as to … Continue reading Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and others: HL 24 May 2006

Drew-Morgan v Hamid-Zadeh: CA 13 May 1999

The claimant landlord had sought to assert that the let was an assured shorthold tenancy. On a rehearing, the tenant said no notice had been served under section 20. The landlord also now asserted non-payment of rent. Held: A notice which was invalid for the purposes for which it was sent might still fulfil some … Continue reading Drew-Morgan v Hamid-Zadeh: CA 13 May 1999

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

Boyland and Son Ltd v Rand: CA 20 Dec 2006

The defendant travellers occupied land belonging to the claimants. A possession order had been obtained, and the defendants now sought a reasonable time to be allowed to leave. Held: The law had not changed, and section 89 could not be used to argue for a suspension of the order for possession. Citations: [2006] EWCA Civ … Continue reading Boyland and Son Ltd v Rand: CA 20 Dec 2006

Manchester City Council v Cochrane and Cochrane: CA 21 Dec 1998

The tenants held an introductory tenancy under the Act. The council sought possession, after giving notice, and after its review under the Act. The tenants objected, but the Council denied the right of the County Court to hear the objection, arguing that the court had no discretion but to order possession, that the right to … Continue reading Manchester City Council v Cochrane and Cochrane: CA 21 Dec 1998

Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames v Prince and Another: CA 2 Dec 1998

The Borough’s tenant had died. His wife and daughter had lived with him, but the mother not for long enough to succeed to his tenancy. The daughter (aged thirteen) claimed to have done so having lived with him for three years. Held: The 1985 Act did not limit its effects to adults. A minor may … Continue reading Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames v Prince and Another: CA 2 Dec 1998

Wrexham County Borough Council v Berry; South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter and another; Chichester District Council v Searle and others: HL 22 May 2003

The appellants challenged the refusal to grant them injunctions to prevent Roma parking caravans on land they had purchased. Held: Parliament had given to local authorities exclusive jurisdiction on matters of planning policy, but when an authority sought assistance in enforcement by requesting an injunction, the role of the court was not merely supervisory, but … Continue reading Wrexham County Borough Council v Berry; South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter and another; Chichester District Council v Searle and others: HL 22 May 2003

Higgs v Brighton and Hove City Council: CA 30 Jun 2003

The applicant lived in a caravan. It disappeared without trace, and he claimed emergency housing under the section. Was housing required as a result of an emergency flood fire or disaster? Held: There was in fact no explanation available for the loss, and it was not proper to require the applicant to provide one. Nevertheless, … Continue reading Higgs v Brighton and Hove City Council: CA 30 Jun 2003

British Broadcasting Corporation v Kelly-Phillips: CA 24 Apr 1998

When a one year fixed term employment contract was extended by a period of less than a year, but then not again renewed, there was no unfair dismissal, since the exemption for the original term applied also to any extension. There had been conflicting interpretations of the statutory provisions. S197 could not be construed on … Continue reading British Broadcasting Corporation v Kelly-Phillips: CA 24 Apr 1998

Northampton Borough Council v Lovatt and Another: CA 11 Nov 1997

The local authority had obtained a possession order against the defendant tenants because of the behaviour of the tenants’ children as ‘conduct which is a nuisance or annoyance to neighbours’ The question on appeal was whether behaviour which related to properties more than 100 metres away from the house fell within the scope of the … Continue reading Northampton Borough Council v Lovatt and Another: CA 11 Nov 1997

Regina v Lam and Others (T/a ‘Namesakes of Torbay’) and Borough of Torbay: CA 30 Jul 1997

The claimant sought damages after the planning authority allowed the first defendant to conduct a manufacturing business in the course of which spraying activities took place which caused them personal injuries and loss of business. Held: The planning system is a regulatory system as envisaged in X (Minors), such that there should be no private … Continue reading Regina v Lam and Others (T/a ‘Namesakes of Torbay’) and Borough of Torbay: CA 30 Jul 1997

King v Jackson (T/a Jackson Flower Company): CA 16 Jul 1997

The defendant appealed an award of pounds 11,000 damages for unlawful eviction of his tenant. The tenant had found herself unable to pay the rent and had given notice to quit. She was then told to leave immediately. The judge awarded statutory damages under section 27 representing the difference between the vacant possession value of … Continue reading King v Jackson (T/a Jackson Flower Company): CA 16 Jul 1997

Regina v London Borough of Harrow ex parte Fahia: CA 7 Mar 1997

The applicant had been found to have deliberately procured her own eviction from her tenanted accommodation in Harrow. She was given temporary accommodation in a guest house, where she stayed for over a year. Her housing benefit was then reduced by half, on the basis that her rent was too high. The landlord then told … Continue reading Regina v London Borough of Harrow ex parte Fahia: CA 7 Mar 1997

Andrews and Another v Brewer and Another: CA 17 Feb 1997

Tenants challenged an order for possession, saying the form of notice was defective. The date specified in the notice was clearly a clerical error. It provided that the tenancy would commence on 29 May 1993 and end on 28 May 1993, on the face of it, a day before its commencement. The premises had previously … Continue reading Andrews and Another v Brewer and Another: CA 17 Feb 1997

Budd v Colchester Borough Council: CA 30 Jan 1997

The applicant sought leave to appeal against a decision confirming a noise abatement notice under the Act. He kept dogs, and neighbours had complained of the noise. He complained that the notice neither specified the nuisance complained of, nor stated what works were required to be undertaken to cure it. Held: There were competing decisions, … Continue reading Budd v Colchester Borough Council: CA 30 Jan 1997

Rees v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Oct 1986

The applicant had been born and registered as a female, but later came to receive treatment and to live as a male. He complained that the respondent had failed to amend his birth certificate. Held: The court accepted that, by failing to confer on a transsexual a right to an amended birth certificate, the state … Continue reading Rees v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Oct 1986

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

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

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

Feakins and Another v Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Civ 1513): CA 9 Dec 2005

The department complained that the defendants had entered into a transaction with their farm at an undervalue so as to defeat its claim for recovery of sums due. The transaction used the grant of a tenancy by the first chargee. Held: The farmers’ appeal as to the farm transaction failed: ‘beyond argument that DEFRA was … Continue reading Feakins and Another v Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Civ 1513): CA 9 Dec 2005

Yemshaw v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 15 Dec 2009

‘The sole but important issue on this appeal is the meaning of ‘violence’ in section 177(1) of the Housing Act 1996 (‘the Act’). The question is whether, for the purposes of that provision, ‘violence’ requires some sort of physical contact or whether, in the context of ‘domestic violence’, it should be understood more widely as … Continue reading Yemshaw v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 15 Dec 2009

Garland v Morris and Another: ChD 11 Jan 2007

The claimant sought additional provision from her father’s estate. She said that the will failed to make reasonable provsion for her, bearing in mind her extreme financial needs. She was a single mother of three. Held: The claim failed. Michael Furness QC J said: ‘the most important factors are first the financial position of the … Continue reading Garland v Morris and Another: ChD 11 Jan 2007

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

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay: HL 19 Feb 1986

Three applicants had lied on entry to secure admission, stayed for a considerable time, and had been treated as illegal immigrants under section 33(1). The fourth’s claim that upon being returned he would been killed, had been rejected without investigation. Held: A claim to refugee status was not an exception to the ban on appeals … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay: HL 19 Feb 1986

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

Swindon Borough Council v Redpath: CA 11 Sep 2009

The defendant appealed against the issuing of an anti-social behaviour order for ‘housing-related conduct’ where the conduct alleged had no connection with council tenants or property. Held: The appeal failed. ‘Housing-related’ meant ‘directly or indirectly relating to or affecting the housing management functions of a relevant landlord’. The defendant was a former council tenant, his … Continue reading Swindon Borough Council v Redpath: CA 11 Sep 2009

Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 29 Jul 2015

The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods were taken lawfully. Held: The segregation was not authorised by the applicable legislation: ‘rule 45 . . (1) enables the governor … Continue reading Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 29 Jul 2015

William Hare Ltd v Shepherd Construction Ltd: TCC 25 Jun 2009

The court considered the operation of a ‘pay when paid’ clause. Judges: Coulson J Citations: [2009] EWHC 1603 (TCC), [2009] BLR 447, 125 Con LR 123, [2009] CILL 2753, [2010] BCC 332 Links: Bailii Statutes: Housing Grants (Construction and Regeneration) Act 1996 113(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Construction, Contract Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.347462

Manchester City Council v Moran and Another; Richards v Ipswich Borough Council: CA 17 Apr 2008

The two applicants had occupied a women’s refuge. They appealed against a refusal to consider them as homeless when they acted in such a way as to be evicted from the refuge, saying that the refuge did not constitute ‘accommodation . . which it would have been reasonable for [them] to continue to occupy’. It … Continue reading Manchester City Council v Moran and Another; Richards v Ipswich Borough Council: CA 17 Apr 2008

London Borough of Wandsworth v Allison: CA 15 Apr 2008

The claimant had applied for emergency housing, saying that he had suffered a deep vein thrombosis, and was vulnerable under the 1996 Act. The authority said that its finding that the VT would not put him at additional risk if homeless, was one of fact against which no appeal lay. The authority now appealing said … Continue reading London Borough of Wandsworth v Allison: CA 15 Apr 2008

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

Waltham Forest v Maloba, The Law Society: CA 4 Dec 2007

The applicant had been refused accomodation as homeless after disclosing the ownership of a family home in Uganda. He had lived and worked in the UK for 15 years. The authority did not accept that it had later been repossessed. The council now appealed against a finding to the contrary, saying that, per Osmani, to … Continue reading Waltham Forest v Maloba, The Law Society: CA 4 Dec 2007

Holmes-Moorhouse v London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames: CA 10 Oct 2007

The court considered the duties of a local authority to provide housing where a a court made a shared residence order. Held: The making of an order for shared residence between a mother and father living apart was not itself determinative to give the father a right to be rehoused through the need to care … Continue reading Holmes-Moorhouse v London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames: CA 10 Oct 2007

Osei v London Borough of Southwark: CA 25 Jul 2007

Judges: Clarke MR, Arden LJ, Hooper LJ Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 787 Links: Bailii Statutes: Housing Act 1996 191 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Regina v Thurrock Borough Council ex parte Williams QBD 1981 The burden when determining intentional homelessness is upon the local authority to be satisfied that the applicant became homeless … Continue reading Osei v London Borough of Southwark: CA 25 Jul 2007

Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011

The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011

Lambeth London Borough Council v Ireneschild: CA 16 Mar 2007

The tenant held a secure tenancy of a first floor flat of the Council. She was severely disabled and argued that the danger of injury meant that she should be allowed to occupy the empty ground floor flat. She complained at the way the authority had relied on reports she had not seen. The authority … Continue reading Lambeth London Borough Council v Ireneschild: CA 16 Mar 2007

Morgan v Stirling Council: SCS 10 Oct 2006

(Outer House) Lord Glennie pointed out that anyone who is homeless is also vulnerable, and accordingly it follows that section 189(1)(c) must contemplate homeless people who would be more vulnerable than many others in the same position (especially given the words ‘or other special reason’ which show that vulnerability arising from many causes is covered). … Continue reading Morgan v Stirling Council: SCS 10 Oct 2006

North Wales Training and Enterprise Council Ltd v Astley and others: HL 21 Jun 2006

Civil servants had been transferred to a private company. At first they worked under secondment from the civil service. They asserted that they had protection under TUPE and the Acquired Rights Directive. The respondent said that there had only been a transfer over time, so as to diminish their periods of continuous employment. The matter … Continue reading North Wales Training and Enterprise Council Ltd v Astley and others: HL 21 Jun 2006

Cramp v Hastings Borough Council: CA 29 Jul 2005

Cases challenged successful appeals by applicants for housing for homelessness, where a county court had ordered a second review of the application. Judges: Brooke LJ, Arden LJ, Longmore LJ Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 1005 Links: Bailii Statutes: Housing Act 1996 184(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Azimi v Newham London Borough Council 2000 … Continue reading Cramp v Hastings Borough Council: CA 29 Jul 2005

Steven We Ping Wall v Sheffield City Council: CA 23 Mar 2006

The appellant had been fostered by the deceased, and on her death continued to live in her house held under a secure tenancy of the respondent. The council sought possession, saying that he was not a member of the deceased’s family within section 113, and that in any event he had not occupied the property … Continue reading Steven We Ping Wall v Sheffield City Council: CA 23 Mar 2006

1 Pump Court Chambers v Horton: EAT 2 Dec 2003

The chambers appealed a finding of discrimination, saying that a pupil was not a member of the set so as to qualify under the Act. Held: The barristers set or chambers was a trade organisation, but the position of a pupil barrister was not that of a member of that chambers so as to attract … Continue reading 1 Pump Court Chambers v Horton: EAT 2 Dec 2003

Regina (A) v Lambeth London Borough Council: CA 5 Nov 2001

The provisions requiring local authorities to look to the welfare of children within their area was a general one, and was not enforceable to secure the interests of individual children. It was not the case that a ‘target’ duty crystallised into an enforceable one, once a child’s needs had been assessed. If that had been … Continue reading Regina (A) v Lambeth London Borough Council: CA 5 Nov 2001

Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd: CA 16 Nov 2005

The parties had disputed payments for subcontracting work on a major project. The matter had been referred to arbitration, and the claimants now appealed refusal of leave to appeal the adjudicator’s award. Held: The dispute was complex and substantial. Nevertheless, the adjudicator ‘not only took the initiative in ascertaining the facts but also applied his … Continue reading Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd: CA 16 Nov 2005

Calgin, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Enfield: Admn 29 Jul 2005

The claimant complained that having applied for housing in the borough they had in fact housed him outside the borough. Held: The authority had a duty to house the applicant so far it was reasonably practicable within its borders. The policy had been adopted after an acute shortage of affordable housing. That policy was not … Continue reading Calgin, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Enfield: Admn 29 Jul 2005

Forcelux Ltd, Re an Appeal Against A Decision of the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal: LT 20 Jan 2004

LT Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.18 – Law of Property Act 1925 s.146 – Housing Act 1996 ss.81 and 82 – jurisdiction of LVT — covenant to pay costs in preparing notices under s.146 – Meaning of ‘service charge’ — landlord’s costs of management — Forcelux v Sweetman not followed Citations: [2004] EWLands LRX … Continue reading Forcelux Ltd, Re an Appeal Against A Decision of the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal: LT 20 Jan 2004

Ilott v The Blue Cross and Others: SC 15 Mar 2017

What is reasonable provision for daughter? The deceased had left her estate in her will to several animal charities. The claimant, her daughter, had been estranged from her mother for many years, and sought reasonable provision from her estate under the 1975 Act. The district judge had rejected her claim. Held: The appeal by the … Continue reading Ilott v The Blue Cross and Others: SC 15 Mar 2017

Connex South Eastern Ltd v M J Building Services Group Plc: CA 1 Mar 2005

The defendant had repudiated the building contract in 2002. The claimant now resisted a request for arbitration, saying the request was an abuse of process after such delay. Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. The Arbitration Act explicitly allowed a reference at any time, and there was nothing in the Act to indicate any restrictive interpretation … Continue reading Connex South Eastern Ltd v M J Building Services Group Plc: CA 1 Mar 2005

Hall v London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 17 Dec 2004

The applicants appealed refusal of their applications for housing having priority housing need being vulnerable because of their mental illness. They said that the original decisions had been reviewed, and that on review deficiencies had been identified in the decisions, but they had not been given opportunity themselves to make representations about the decisions. Held: … Continue reading Hall v London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 17 Dec 2004

Osmani v London Borough of Camden: CA 16 Dec 2004

Auld LJ set out the test to be applied by an authority when deciding whether the applicant was vulnerable for the purposes of deciding whether to give priority housing assistance. The courts had recognised the difficult, involved nature of the decision-making process, particularly in the context of decisions on vulnerability and priority need. Auld LJ … Continue reading Osmani v London Borough of Camden: CA 16 Dec 2004

Stewart v London Borough of Lambeth: CA 26 Apr 2002

The local authority said that the claimant, having been sentenced to a term of five years imprisonment for drugs offences, had made himself intentionally homeless within the section. While in prison, he was evicted from the flat for non-payment of rent. He had arranged with his sister that the rent should continue to be paid … Continue reading Stewart v London Borough of Lambeth: CA 26 Apr 2002

Spink, Regina (on the Application Of) v Wandsworth Borough Council: Admn 20 Oct 2004

Parents requested the local authority to make provision for their severely disabled children. The local authority wished when deciding whether to provide adaptations of the house to make allowance for the parents’ financial resources. Held: The defendant authority is correct in its contention that it can lawfully have regard to parental resources when deciding under … Continue reading Spink, Regina (on the Application Of) v Wandsworth Borough Council: Admn 20 Oct 2004

Morris, Regina (on the Application of) v Westminster City Council and Another: Admn 7 Oct 2004

The applicant questioned the compatibility of s185 of the 1996 Act with Human Rights law. The family sought emergency housing. The child of the family, found to be in priority housing need, was subject also to immigration control. Though the matter had been settled the court was invited to pursue the decision. Held: The Act … Continue reading Morris, Regina (on the Application of) v Westminster City Council and Another: Admn 7 Oct 2004

Oxfordshire County Council v GB and Others: CA 22 Aug 2001

When an appeal was lodged against the decision of the Special Educational Needs Tribunal, it was wrong for that Tribunal later to expand on its reasons, save in exceptional circumstances. Parental preference was not an overriding consideration, given the possible substantial costs of providing education in a special school. The tribunal must strike a balance, … Continue reading Oxfordshire County Council v GB and Others: CA 22 Aug 2001

Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union: SC 24 Jan 2017

Parliament’s Approval if statute rights affected In a referendum, the people had voted to leave the European Union. That would require a notice to the Union under Article 50 TEU. The Secretary of State appealed against an order requiring Parliamentary approval before issuing the notice, he saying that the notice could be given under the … Continue reading Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union: SC 24 Jan 2017