When considering whether a person was vulnerable so as to be treated more favourably in applying for rehousing: ‘The Council should consider such application afresh applying the statutory criterion: The Ortiz test should not be used; the dictum of Simon Brown LJ in that case should no longer be considered good law. (The same applies … Continue reading Regina v London Borough of Camden ex parte Pereira: CA 20 May 1998
No homelessness priority could be established by means of having a child applying for housing, rather than his or her parent. An application by a person suffering mental disability who would also be dependent upon others was also rejected. In each case the true application was by the parent or carer. The Act is concerned … Continue reading Regina v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Garlick and similar: HL 19 Mar 1993
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
Sedley J said that , there would be a real risk that ‘a sick and vulnerable individual (and I do not use the word ‘vulnerable’ in its statutory sense) is going to be put out on the streets’, which he described as a ‘reproach to a society that considers itself to be civilised’. Sedley J … Continue reading Regina v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham ex parte Fleck: Admn 18 Aug 1997
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
The father had been awarded shared residence for three children. He asked the local authority to provide appropriate housing. Held: The authority’s appeal succeeded. ‘When any family court decides with whom the children of separated parents are to live, the welfare of those children must be its paramount consideration: the Children Act 1989, section 1(1). … Continue reading Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond Upon Thames: HL 4 Feb 2009
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
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
The claimant said the authority had not discharged its duty to him in considering his application for housing. It had written to him saying ‘this is your one and final offer’, and that the council was satisfied that the accommodation was suitable for the needs of Mr Omar and his family and that it would … Continue reading Omar v Birmingham City Council: CA 7 Jun 2007
The applicants, intending university students, challenged the decision to raise to andpound;9,000 per annum, the fees which might be charged by qualifying universities.Elias LJ said: ‘Contrary to a submission advanced by Ms Mountfield, I do not accept that this means that it is for the court to determine whether appropriate weight has been given to … Continue reading Hurley and Moore, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills: Admn 17 Feb 2012
The court examined ‘a short but important point on the inter-relationship between the provisions of Part III of the Children Act 1989, headed ‘Local Authority Support for Children and Families’, and the homelessness provisions of Part VII of the Housing Act 1996, in particular sections 188 and 189, headed ‘Interim duty to accommodate”. Judges: Walll … Continue reading M, Regina (on the Application of) v Hammersmith and Fulham: CA 5 Jul 2006
The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental difficulties which afflicted her following that incarceration. She now appealed from rejection of that claim by … Continue reading Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 10 May 2017
The Court considered the duties imposed on housing authorities under Part VII of the 1996 Act. Held: Article 6.1 did apply, but in any event the procedure applied under the Act conformed to its requirements. Judges: Guido Raimondi, P Citations: 40378/10 (Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) : Court (Fourth Section)), [2015] ECHR 924, [2015] HLR … Continue reading Fazia Ali v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Oct 2015
The tenant family appealed against a decision that the authority had no duty to rehouse them after they suffered violence. They had been living for a year in Swansea and on being granted indefinite leave to remain they were now eligible under Part VII of the 1996 Act. They applied to Kensington which referred them … Continue reading Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Danesh: CA 5 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
Neuberger LJ said: ‘ I turn to the text of the letter of 25 January 2002. It referred to the Council ‘making a reasonable and suitable offer of permanent accommodation’, but it made no reference to the opinion that it was or would be reasonable for the respondent to accept the accommodation On a fair … Continue reading Tower Hamlets v Begum (Rikha): CA 23 Mar 2005
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
Application for permission to appeal against refusal of leave to bring judicial review of decision by the respondent to close the Independent Living Fund. Held: McCombe LJ summarised the application of section 149 of the 2010 Act: ‘1 . . equality duties are an integral and important part of the mechanisms for ensuring the fulfilment … Continue reading Bracking and Others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 6 Nov 2013
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
Claim for damages for breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights arising out of alleged breaches of statutory duty under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996. Citations: [2018] EWHC 1287 (Admin) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Housing, Human Rights Updated: 23 April 2022; Ref: scu.618117
The Court was asked whether and when n a person who is homeless and suffers from mental illness may apply for housing under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 (‘HA 1996’). Judges: Arden, Lewison, Asplin :JJ Citations: [2018] EWCA Civ 928, [2018] WLR(D) 256 Links: Bailii, WLRD Jurisdiction: England and Wales Housing Updated: 20 … Continue reading WB v W District Council: CA 26 Apr 2018
The claimant had been released from prison and sought to be housed as a homeless person. He said that his imprisonment brought him within the category of having special need. He also claimed damages for the breach. Held: The Act was intended to confer a general social benefit of reducing homelessness, not a right in … Continue reading O’Rourke v Mayor etc of the London Borough of Camden: HL 12 Jun 1997
Claim for judicial review brought against the defendant, the London Borough of Waltham Forest alleging that, having concluded that the claimant was not a ‘priority need’, it failed to perform its duty under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996, in particular to provide appropriate advice and assistance (s.192(2)) and accommodation in the exercise of … Continue reading Smajlaj, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Waltham Forest: Admn 26 May 2016
Unrelated Detriment was no Discrimination The tenant had left his flat and sublet it so as to allow the landlord authority an apparently unanswerable claim for possession. The authority appealed a finding that they had to take into account the fact that the tenant was disabled and make reasonable adjustments. Held: The authority’s appeal succeeded. … Continue reading London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm: HL 25 Jun 2008
Appeal against an order dismissing the appellant’s appeal against the review decision of the respondent local housing authority.Underhill LJ discussed statistical evidence on a section 202 review in relation to an applicant who was said to be a suicide risk if he was made homeless: ‘[E]ven if it is right, as seems plausible enough even … Continue reading Ajilore v London Borough of Hackney: CA 8 Oct 2014
Mr Kanu, aged 48, had physical problems, including back pain, hepatitis B, hypertension and haemorrhoids, as well as psychotic symptoms and suicidal ideation. His wife assisted him in taking the necessary drugs, but stress would raise his hypertension to ‘quite dangerous levels’, requiring an increase in the dose of the relevant drugs. An order for … Continue reading Kanu v The London Borough of Southwark: CA 29 Jul 2014
Arden, Jackson McCombe LJJ [2013] EWCA Civ 752 Bailii Housing Act 1996 England and Wales Citing: Cited – Regina v London Borough of Camden ex parte Pereira CA 20-May-1998 When considering whether a person was vulnerable so as to be treated more favourably in applying for rehousing: ‘The Council should consider such application afresh applying … Continue reading Johnson v Solihull: CA 6 Jun 2013
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
The claimants, all under 17 years old, took a peaceful part in a substantial but disorderly demonstration in London. The police decided to contain the section of crowd which included the claimants. The claimants said that the containment of children was unlawful within section 11 of the 2004 Act, and had been excessive in time. … Continue reading Castle and Others v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis: Admn 8 Sep 2011
The appellant asked whether the statutory review of a housing authority’s decision on whether he was intentionally homeless was a determination of a civil right, and if so whether the review was of the appropriate standard. The claimant said that she had not received a letter informing her of the consequences of not accepting an … Continue reading Tomlinson and Others v Birmingham City Council: SC 17 Feb 2010
The claimant sought a declaration that the duty set out in the 1995 Act applies to the discharge of duties, and to the exercise of powers, by local housing authorities under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 being the part entitled ‘Homelessness’. The defendant argued that (1) the section concerned only the general formulation … Continue reading Pieretti v London Borough of Enfield: CA 12 Oct 2010
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
Having ‘due regard’ is not Obligation to do The claimant sought to challenge the decision to close her local post office on the basis that being retired and disabled and without a car in a rural area, the office was essential and the decision unsupportable. In particular she challenged the removal of post offices from … Continue reading Brown, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 18 Dec 2008
The House was asked whether when a child of 16 or 17 who was ejected from home and presents himself to a local children’s services authority and asks to be accommodated by them under section 20 of the Children Act 1989, it is open to that authority instead to arrange for him to be accommodated … Continue reading G, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough Of Southwark: HL 20 May 2009
The court considered the extent of an Authority’s duties when a young woman (17) came to its attention under section 17 of the 1989 Act. The claimant was fleeing the domestic violence of her partner. The authority had said that she should seek help not from Social Services but instead through family services or victim … Continue reading MM, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Lewisham: Admn 6 Mar 2009
The claimant challenged the legaity of resolutions passed by three local authorities which were critical of the State of Israel. They said that the resolultions infringed the Public Sector Equality Duty under section 149 of the 2010 Act, and also had failed as require to consider the effect it might have in the Jewish community, … Continue reading Jewish Rights Watch (T/A Jewish Human Rights Watch), Regina (on The Application of) v Leicester City Council: Admn 28 Jun 2016
The House was asked ‘whether a local social services authority is obliged, under section 21(1)(a) of the 1948 Act, to arrange (and pay for) residential accommodation for a person subject to immigration control who is HIV positive but whose only needs, other than for a home and subsistence, are for medication prescribed by his doctor … Continue reading M, Regina (on the Application of) v Slough Borough Council: HL 30 Jul 2008
Failure to Provide Signers was Discriminatory The claimant challenged the failure of the respondent to provide sign language interpreters to accompany public service broadcasts during the Covid pandemic. The parties agreed that the steps taken for later broadcasts had satisfied the requirements, but disagreed as to the need for continued review, the defendant saying that … Continue reading Rowley, Regina (on The Application of) v Minister for The Cabinet Office: Admn 28 Jul 2021
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
Dyson LJ considered the interaction between race relations law and planning permission in the context of gypsy encampments. He looked at section 71 of the 1976 Act and said: ‘In my judgment, it is important to emphasise that the section 71(1) duty is not a duty to achieve a result, namely to eliminate unlawful racial … Continue reading Baker and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others: CA 28 Feb 2008
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
The court was asked whether, when assessing an applicant’s ‘priority need for accommodation’ under section 189(1)(c) Housing Act 1996 (that is, whether the applicant is ‘vulnerable’ by reason of old age, mental illness or handicap or physical . .
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
The court was asked as to the duty of local housing authorities towards homeless people who claim to be ‘vulnerable’, and therefore to have ‘a priority need’ for the provision of housing accommodation under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996. Those . .
The Council had taken leases of properties from a Housing Association to provide accomodation to the homeless, satisfying its statutory duties. The tenant B was said to be a non-secure tenant, but the tenancy agreement did not reflect the terms of . .
