‘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 delay is that the applicant was unrepresented and was seeking legal aid.’
Judges:
David Richards, Phillips LJJ, Sir Stephen Richards
Citations:
[2020] EWCA Civ 51, [2020] WLR(D) 56
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – 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. . .
Appeal from – 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 . .
Cited – Emambee v London Borough of Islington QBD 25-Oct-2019
. .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Housing
Updated: 15 October 2022; Ref: scu.646809