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 to house the appellants had ceased. The review panel upheld the authority’s decision. The County Court dismissed his appeal finding no jurisdiction to entertain it because there was no provision in section 202 to request a review of the suitability of the accommodation offered under Part VI.
Held: The tenant’s appeal succeeded. The judge not given due weight to the width of section 202(1)(b). Section 202(1)(b) is directed to the question whether a duty arises The result of the review was that the local authority was confirming a decision that there was no longer any duty owed to the appellants under section 193, or otherwise under Part VII of the Act. A county court was given jurisdiction by the Act to hear an appeal against a determination by the local authority that it had satisfied its obligation toward an applicant for housing under the homelessness provisions and had no further obligation to assist. The process had two stages, the request for a review by the authority itself, and then an appeal to the County Court.

Judges:

Chadwick LJ

Citations:

Gazette 14-Jul-1999, Times 21-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1691, [2000] 1 WLR 969

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 204 202(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedThe Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Rahanara Begum CA 11-Feb-2005
The applicant sought housing as a homeless person. Temporary accommodation was provided, and an offer of permanent accommodation was made but rejected. The council then sought possession of the temporary accommodation. The applicant responded that . .
CitedSlater v London Borough of Lewisham CA 12-Apr-2006
The applicant was heavily pregnant when she was offered a first floor one bedroomed flat. She rejected it.
Held: When a housing authority reviewed its decision on the applicant’s decision not to accept the accommodation offered, that review . .
AppliedRavichandran 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146606

Regina v Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council Ex Parte Grillo: CA 13 Jun 1995

There was no general onus on Local Authorities to give reasons for their decisions in the absence of any explicit or particular duty.

Citations:

Independent 13-Jun-1995, (1995) 28 HLR 94

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHasan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 25-Nov-2008
The claimant appealed refusal of leave to bring judicial review of decisions to sell arms to the Israeli state. He lived in Palestine and said that Israel had destroyed his farm, and that licences broke the criteria under the 2002 Act. He said that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.87057

Mohamed v Manek and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: CA 28 Apr 1995

The claimant applied to the Council for accommodation, claiming to be homeless and in priority need. The council housed him in a hotel owned by Mr Manek in Tooting Bec . He had a room, a separate bathroom and lavatory, and shared use of a kitchen. After three days the council completed their investigations. Though homeless, he was not in priority need, and his accommodation arrangement would be terminated. He was given time to challenge this in court. He obtained an interim injunction against being evicted without a court order. The council appealed, but Mr Manek did not.
Held: Anti-harassment provisions in the 1977 Act do not apply to temporary housing provided by the Local Authority through a third party. The court adopted a purposive approach to interpretation of the Act, but restricted the finding to the particular arrangements in this hostel.
Auld LJ reviewed the case law on evictions: ‘In my view, none of those cases, on their facts or holdings, are of assistance in this case. The question here is not simply whether the hotel room was ‘occupied’ by Mr Mohamed as his residence or dwelling, but whether the council licensed him to occupy it as a dwelling. And, even if, contrary to my view, the agreement between the council and Mr Mohamed was a licence, it was clearly tailored to the fulfilment by the council of their statutory duty to arrange temporary accommodation under section 63 or 65 of the 1985 Act, no more.
The provisions in Part III of the 1985 Act for housing the homeless were formerly in the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977. In my view, the provisions of the other Act of 1977, the Protection from Eviction Act, cannot have been intended to apply to the temporary housing by or on behalf of councils of the homeless. Under Part III of the 1985 Act councils have a public duty to secure accommodation under section 63 or 65 for many people. It is in the interests of good public administration that they should not have to commit their limited resources to securing accommodation for persons to whom, after making due inquiries, they properly decide they have no duty, at the expense of others to whom they may have a duty. The threshold for the duty is a low one, ‘reason to believe that an applicant may be homeless and have a priority need’. The inquiries may take only a few days and result in a decision that a temporarily housed applicant is not in fact homeless or in priority need. A council’s ability efficiently to perform their public duty as a local housing authority could be seriously affected if the protection of the 1977 Act were automatically to attach to every temporarily housed unsuccessful applicant for housing just because he had been able to satisfy the low threshold under section 63 for investigation of his application.
In my view, as a matter of construction of section 3(2B) of the 1977 Act, the expression ‘occupied as a dwelling under a licence’ cannot apply to bed-and-breakfast accommodation of this sort, when, as here, it is provided pursuant to an agreement clearly intended as a purely temporary arrangement pending the making of inquiries under section 62. The council’s duty under section 63 is only to secure accommodation pending those inquiries and their decision as a result of them. It cannot have been the intention of Parliament that there should be grafted on to that public and temporary obligation an extension of it by at least four weeks drawn from another statute dealing with the private rights and duties of landlords (licensors) and tenants (licensees) as between themselves. Nor does it accord with the ordinary use of language to describe temporary accommodation in a hotel or hostel for this purpose as premises ‘occupied as a dwelling under a licence’. In my view, that is so whether the council provide the accommodation themselves or arrange it through some third party, subject in each case, however, to any contrary agreement. The agreement here was plainly not to the contrary. It bore all the marks of an arrangement for the purpose of section 63 only, and not, in Lord Greene’s words, ‘as a matter of fair and reasonable construction of simple words’ as premises occupied as a dwelling under a licence.’
Auld LJ: ‘If, despite the facts as I have summarised them, the council’s decision not to continue the arrangement at the Thames Hotel was a decision to discontinue securing temporary accommodation under section 63 of the 1985 Act, as distinct from an attempt to evict him without notice contrary to section 3 of the 1977 Act, it was a public law decision. It is not the decision that Mr Mohamed has sought to challenge in these proceedings. He could not do so, because, as a general rule, it is contrary to public policy and an abuse of process to allow proceedings by way of an ordinary action to challenge a decision affecting rights entitled to protection under public law. . . Nor is this a case where a private right has come into existence as a result of the council’s public law decision, so that ordinary civil proceedings may be taken to require them to discharge their executive, as distinct from their decision-making, function . . . Here the public law decision, if there was one, not to continue to secure temporary accommodation to Mr Mohamed did not confer on him any private right. It is the public law decision itself that Mr Mohamed seeks to challenge. The only way he can do that is to seek leave to apply for judicial review. Such a procedure, in its provision for interim relief, is capable of providing much longer tenure pending determination of a substantive application than the four weeks’ notice provided by the 1977 Act.’
Nourse LJ: ‘I rest my decision primarily on the simple proposition, derived from a purposive construction of both statutes, that accommodation made available for an applicant pursuant to section 63(1) of the Housing Act 1985 pending a decision as a result of the local housing authority’s inquiries under section 62 cannot, as a general rule, be premises let as a dwelling under a tenancy [or][1] premises occupied as a dwelling under a licence within section 3(1) and (2B) respectively of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977. The context and purpose of section 63(1) have been fully considered by Auld LJ and I agree with the views he has expressed. Moreover, it cannot be a purpose of the 1977 Act to give protection to persons whose entirely transient needs bring them within section 63(1). True, the general rule may be displaced by an agreement between an authority and an applicant such as had been entered into in Eastleigh Borough Council v. Walsh [1985] 1 W.L.R. 525, or perhaps if the applicant’s occupation is allowed to continue on a more than transient basis. But there was no such agreement or occupation here, nor anything else to take the case out of the general rule.
Judge Phelan, having referred to the judgment of Lord Denning M.R. in Luganda v. Service Hotels Ltd [1969] 2 Ch. 209 at 218-219, said that that case was from a long time ago and that here he was dealing with the rather different situation of the homeless in 1994. He added:
‘Certainly persons spending a few nights in a hotel normally have a dwelling elsewhere. This is not the situation of the homeless who have no dwelling. Where else would the Plaintiff be dwelling, even if for a very short time?’
Those observations suggest that the judge proceeded on an assumption that everyone must have a dwelling somewhere. In my view the 1977 Act makes no such assumption. Without some element of more than transient occupation, premises cannot properly be called a dwelling. Lord Denning’s observations are as valid now as they were in 1969. The two authorities relied on by the judge, Thurrock Urban District Council v. Shina (1972) 23 P. and C.R. 205 and Thrasyvoulou v. London Borough of Hackney (1986) 18 H.L.R. 370, are readily distinguishable.’
Auld LJ, said: ‘In my view, as a matter of construction of section 3(2B) of the 1977 Act, the expression ‘occupied as a dwelling under a licence’ cannot apply to bed-and -breakfast accommodation of this sort, when, as here, it is provided pursuant to an agreement clearly intended as a purely temporary arrangement pending the making of enquiries under section 62. The council’s duty under section 63 is only to secure accommodation pending those inquiries and their decision as a result of them. It cannot have been the intention of Parliament that there should be grafted on to that public and temporary obligation an extension of it by at least four weeks drawn from another statute dealing with the private rights and duties of landlords (licensors) and tenants (licensees) as between themselves. Nor does it accord with the ordinary use of language to describe the temporary accommodation in a hotel or hostel for this purpose as premises ‘occupied as a dwelling under a licence’. In my view, that is so whether the council provide the accommodation themselves or arrange it through some third party, subject in each case, however, to any contrary agreement. The agreement here was plainly not to the contrary. It bore all the marks of an arrangement for the purpose of section 63 only and not, in Lord Greene’s words, ‘as a matter of fair and reasonable construction of simple words’ as premises occupied as a dwelling under a licence.’
Nourse LJ pointed out that the general rule that accommodation made available for this temporary purpose was not to be considered a ‘dwelling’ under the 1977 Act might be displaced ‘if the applicant’s occupation is allowed to continue on a more than transient basis.’

Judges:

Auld, Henry and Nourse LJJ

Citations:

Times 28-Apr-1995, [1995] 27 HLR 439, (1995) 30 HLR 481

Statutes:

Protection from Eviction Act 1977 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCocks v Thanet District Council HL 25-Nov-1981
The applicant had been given temporary accomodation under the Act. He sought to enforce the obligation on the respondent to house him permanently by an action in the county court. The authority said the action should have been by judicial review. . .
CitedMohram Ali v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council CA 27-May-1992
A challenge to the exercise of homelessness duties by a local authority must be by way of Judicial Review. Nolan LJ: ‘It follows that in my judgment the public law duties of the council were not discharged until they had completed the process of . .

Cited by:

CitedBrennan v London Borough of Lambeth CA 3-Jun-1997
The appellant sought to resist his eviction from temporary hostel accomodation provided to him by the local authority, saying that the provisions of the 1977 Act protected him.
Held: The agreement was a licence excluded from protection by the . .
Not per incuriamDesnousse v London Borough of Newham and others CA 17-May-2006
The occupier had been granted a temporary licence by the authority under the homelessness provisions whilst it made its assessment. The assessment concluded that she had become homeless intentionally, and therefore terminated the licence and set out . .
ConsideredRogerson v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council 2005
The court considered both whether Mohamed v. Manek was still binding and whether the facts of the case were covered by the prior decision, having regard in particular to the emphasis on transience which emerges from the judgment of Nourse LJ. Heled: . .
CitedRogerson v Wigan Metropolican Borough Council QBD 14-Jul-2004
The claimant sought damages under the 1977 Act. The defendant said it had behaved lawfully. He had been housed in a hostel pending a decision on the application for permanent housing as a homeless person, which the defendant said excluded him from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Administrative

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.83788

Cadogan Estates Ltd v McMahon: CA 9 Jun 1999

A provision in a tenancy agreement that the tenancy would cease upon the bankruptcy of the tenant, continued and became part of the terms of a statutory tenancy following the contractual one. The provision was not inconsistent with the idea of the statutory tenancy, and the term was implied into the statutory tenancy.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith and Laws L.JJ. and Jonathan Parker J.)

Citations:

Times 01-Jun-1999, Gazette 03-Jun-1999, Gazette 09-Jun-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1470, [1999] 1 WLR 1689, [1999] L and TR 481

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Rent Act 1977 98(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromCadogan Estates Limited v McMahon HL 26-Oct-2000
When a tenancy was terminated and was followed by a statutory tenancy, a term in the contractual tenancy that the tenancy should be forfeit on the tenant’s bankruptcy was continued in and inherited by the statutory tenancy. Though perhaps in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Housing, Insolvency

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.78822

Jarvis v Evans and Another: CA 7 Jul 2020

The Court considered the scope of the licensing requirement and the consequences of failing to comply with it. Must a landlord be licensed to serve a notice under section 8 of the Housing Act 1988 (‘the 1988 Act’)? If he must, is a notice served by an unlicensed landlord nugatory?

Judges:

Lord Justice Newey

Citations:

[2020] EWCA Civ 854

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

The Housing (Wales) Act 2014

Jurisdiction:

Wales

Housing

Updated: 31 December 2022; Ref: scu.652312

Rotherham Action Group Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council: Admn 30 Apr 2015

The claimant challenged the defendant’s decision approving the designation of four areas in Rotherham as being subject to selective licensing pursuant to section 80 of the Housing Act 2004.

Judges:

Stewart J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 1216 (Admin), [2015] HLR 34, [2015] PTSR 1312, [2015] LLR 575

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 2004
880

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 31 December 2022; Ref: scu.546219

Teixeira v London Borough of Lambeth: CA 10 Oct 2008

The court considered the right of residence in this country of an EEA national who is not a worker but who has a child who is in education here is in issue.

Judges:

Mummery LJ, Jacob LJ, Stanley Burnton LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1088, [2009] HLR 9, [2009] Eu LR 253

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, European, Housing

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.276805

Hawes v Evenden: CA 1953

The claimant had lived with the deceased tenant for 12 years and had had two children with him. They had not married.
Held: There was evidence that the claimant and the tenant and the children had lived together as a family and she was therefore a member of his family for the purposes of the Act of 1920.

Judges:

Somervell L.J

Citations:

[1953] 1 WLR 1169

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFitzpatrick 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Family

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.215907

Regina v Bristol County Court Ex Parte Bradic: CA 1 Sep 1995

An unlawful eviction did not of itself constitute an emergency giving the applicant ‘priority need’ for housing. The event that results in the homelessness of the person claiming a priority need must have the characteristics of being ‘an emergency’ and ‘a disaster’. The omission of the word ‘any’ before the words ‘other disaster’ in the 1985 Act reinforces this reading of the subsection. The court interpreted the words of the subsection to mean an emergency such as flood, fire or other disaster of a similar nature. The line is not to be drawn as narrowly as to confine the emergencies which can give rise to a priority need to those amounting to ‘force majeure’. Parliament must have had in mind emergencies caused by fires deliberately or accidentally caused by human beings. The line is to be drawn so as to embrace all emergencies which consist of physical damage to the accommodation of the applicant which have made the accommodation uninhabitable.

Judges:

Roch LJ

Citations:

Gazette 15-Sep-1995, Independent 01-Sep-1995, (1995) HLR 584

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 59(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedNoble v South Herefordshire District Council CA 1983
The argument (that the word ’emergency’ was used in a wider sense than emergencies confined to emergencies arising from disaster) had no force in this case because in the phrase ‘any emergency such as flood, fire or any other disaster’ the words ‘or . .

Cited by:

CitedHiggs 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.86209

Brent London Borough Council v Murphy: CA 1995

The defendant was a secure tenant. When she was sued for arrears of rent, she counterclaimed for damages for breach of the landlord’s obligation to repair for over seven years. The judge awarded her general damages for diminution of the value of the tenancy calculated by reference to a reduction in the rent payable and general damages by reference to an annual sum. The award totalled pounds 50,000.
Held: Leave to appeal was refused. One ground of appeal was that the awards of damages were excessive. Roch LJ said that there was no indication that the awards were wrong in principle or excessive in amount. Damages may be awarded on both bases.

Judges:

Roch LJ

Citations:

[1995] 28 HLR 203

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.245598

Spath Holme Ltd v Greater Manchester and Lancashire Rent Assessment Committee: CA 9 Aug 1995

The rent assessment committee had rejected market rent comparables as an indicator of market rent for the subject premises, because, inter alia, they were not satisfied of the actual absence of scarcity, and thus found that the landlord had not demonstrated the unsoundness of registered fair rent comparables.
Held: The decision was upheld. A fair rent is a market rent ignoring personal circumstances and scarcity. Comparables were wrongly rejected where discounting for scarcity and security possible. Fair rents were based on market rents, less scarcity and other disregards, and were not reasonable rents in any other sense including their impact on tenants. The Court gave general guidance to rent assessment committees making it clear that they were expected to follow market rent comparables as the best evidence of the starting point for fair rents, to give clear reasons and to explain their determinations with arithmetic if necessary. A ‘fair rent’ under the 1977 Act is the same as a ‘market rent’ under the 1988 Act save for the assumption of no scarcity and allowing for the statutory’disregards’, and that, in assessing a fair rent, regard should be had to market rent comparables if any: ‘… the fair rent to be determined is a market rent less the disregards and discounted for scarcity. Thus, … if there is no scarcity and no disregards then the rents should be the same whether the tenancy is a regulated tenancy or an assured tenancy.’
A fair rent is an adjusted market rent and market rent comparables are relevant to the assessment of a fair rent: ‘In this case there are a number of flats in the same block let on assured tenancies at, by definition, open market rents which are virtually identical to those for which a fair rent is to be determined. In my judgment if, in those circumstances, a Rent Assessment Committee wishes to exercise its discretion to adopt some other comparable or method of assessment it will be failing in its duty to give reasons if it does not explain why.
In this case the third reason given by the Rent Assessment Committee as recorded by the judge was that the registered rent comparables had not been demonstrated to be unsound. That is not, of course, a reason for rejecting the assured tenancy comparables. It is not for the court to say in advance what would be a good reason for doing so but if such a reason involves ‘working through’ such comparables so be it: that consequence is no ground for rejecting the validity of its cause. But it should also be noted that the registered rent comparables are not in their nature any more or less sound than the open market rent with or without discount. Any registered rent has built into at least two variables namely the open market rent and the discount for scarcity. Each should have been considered at the time of the original determination. The assessment of the soundness of that registered rent for use as a comparable would require each of those variables to be reconsidered at the time of their possible use as a comparable.
In this connection it was also objected that if the Rent Assessment Committee were required to give detailed reasons that might necessitate giving detailed arithmetical workings or quantifying the degree of scarcity involved contrary to statements in Guppy’s Property v. Knott No 1 … and Metropolitan Properties v. Laufer … But those statements were made in relation to the facts of those cases. It does not follow that there will not be cases in which the duty to give reasons will require such workings or quantification to be afforded.’

Judges:

Glidewell LJ. and Sir John May

Citations:

Ind Summary 28-Aug-1995, Times 09-Aug-1995, (1995) 28 HLR 107, [1995] 2 EGLR 80

Statutes:

Rent Act 1977 70(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromSpath Home Ltd v Greater Manchester and Lancashire Rent Assessment Committee QBD 13-Jul-1994
The rent assessment committee had rejected proposed market rent comparables as an indicator of market rent for the premises, because they were not satisfied of the actual absence of scarcity. The landlord had not demonstrated the unsoundness of . .

Cited by:

CitedSheppard-Capurro, Regina (on the Application of) v London Rent Assessment Panel Admn 27-Jul-2005
. .
CitedCurtis v Chairman of London Rent Assessment Committee; Huntingford and Packford CA 9-Oct-1997
The claimant sought to appeal the quashing of determinations of a fair rent for two properties. . .
See alsoSpath Holme Ltd v Chairman of the Greater Manchester and Lancashire Rent Assessment Committee (No2); Curtis v Similar QBD 2-Jan-1998
A Bill of costs could be presented even though counsel’s fee had not yet been agreed; an extension of time was properly granted. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.89447

Cumpsty, Regina (on the Application of) v Rent Service: Admn 8 Nov 2002

Judges:

Pitchford J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 2526 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHeffernan, Regina (on the Application of) v the Rent Service Admn 10-Oct-2006
The claimant sought judicial review of the redetermination of housing benefits payable in respect of two flats rented out by him. The rent office said that the regulations were merely intended to put in statute form the previous practice used when . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.251515

Habinteg Housing Association v Jones: CA 1995

A female tenant endured six years of misery caused by cockroaches, described as a quite appalling infestation for which she was in no way responsible.
Held: The court was not satisfied that the dismissal of the tenant’s claim was the right result which the law ought to reach and that the tenant ought to have some compensation for the misery she had suffered because of the cockroaches. Nevertheless neither the tenant nor her family had any civil remedy for the injuries to their health or to their property which they have had to endure through living in unfit conditions: ‘It may be that the Public Health Act, or its successor, provides some means for securing that these matters are put right promptly, but it does not seem to have worked in this case. We are told that the Law Commission has been considering such a problem. It is to be hoped that they will recommend a solution. What is more, it is to be hoped that if they do, Parliament will carry it out. Judges and lawyers are sometimes reproached when the law does not produce the right result. There are occasions when the reproach should be directed elsewhere.’

Judges:

Staughton LJ

Citations:

[1995] 27 HLR 299

Statutes:

Public Health Act 1936

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedIssa (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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.221533

Payne and Woodland v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Barnet: CA 22 May 1997

The sale of a council house imposed an additional duty on a local authority to disclose known structural defects to buyers.

Citations:

Times 24-Jun-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1752, (1998) 10 Admin LR 185, (1998) 30 HLR 295, (1998) 76 P and CR 293

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedBlake and Another v Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council QBD 1-Nov-1996
A Local Authority has no duty of care for the correctness of a valuation undertaken for a right to buy transaction. It was not just or reasonable to impose a duty of care on a local authority in connection with its statement of its opinion as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Housing

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.142148

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 explaining that the true reasons for the decision where not those expressed in the decision letter but different reasons set out in the affidavit.
Held: A Local Authority cannot later change the reasons given for a finding of intentional homelessness. The courts are not receptive to ex post facto justification of decisions.
Hutchinson LJ considered the circumstances in which it was appropriate to admit and rely upon evidence adduced for the purpose of explaining or adding to the reasons for a decision made by a decision-maker, and said: ‘The Court can and, in appropriate cases, should admit evidence to elucidate or, exceptionally, correct or add to the reasons; but should, consistently with Steyn LJ’s observations in ex p Graham, be very cautious about doing so. I have in mind cases where, for example, an error has been made in transcription or expression, or a word or words inadvertently omitted, or where the language used may be in some way lack in clarity. These examples are not intended to the exhaustive, but rather to reflect my view that the function of such evidence should generally be elucidation not fundamental alteration, confirmation not contradiction.’
Hutchinson LJ expressed the general principle: ‘While it is true, as Schiemann J recognised in Ex p Shield, that judicial review is a discretionary remedy and that relief may be refused in cases where, even though the ground of challenge is made good, it is clear that on reconsideration the decision would be the same, I agree with Rose J’s comments in Ex p Carpenter that, in cases where the reasons stated in the decision letter have been shown to be manifestly flawed, it should only be in very exceptional cases that relief should be refused on the strength of reasons adduced in evidence after the commencement of proceedings. Accordingly, efforts to secure a discretionary refusal of relief by introducing evidence of true reasons significantly different from the stated reasons are unlikely to succeed.’

Judges:

Hutchinson LJ

Citations:

Times 20-Nov-1995, [1996] 2 All ER 302, [1995] EWCA Civ 42, (1996) 28 HLR 819, [1996] COD 391, (1996) 8 Admin LR 389, [1996] 2 FCR 208, (1996) 160 JP Rep 814

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1995 64

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedWestminster City Council v Great Portland Estates plc HL 31-Oct-1984
The House was asked whether the 1971 Act permitted the relevant authorities, by resort to their development plans, to support the retention of traditional industries or was the ambit of the Act such as to permit only ‘land use’ aims to be pursued? . .

Cited by:

CitedEston 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 . .
DistinguishedFreeserve Com Plc, Regina (on the Application Of) v Customs and Excise Admn 31-Oct-2003
The applicant sought to challenge a decision of the respondent not to charge a US competitor trading within the UK to VAT. They complained that the decision had been affected by irrelevant considerations.
Held: A supplier making supplies from . .
CitedRichardson and Orme v North Yorkshire County Council CA 19-Dec-2003
The claimants appealed against an order dismissing their application for a judicial review of the respondent’s grant of planning permission. They contended that a councillor with an interest in the matter had wrongfully not been excluded from the . .
CitedWall, Regina (on the Application of) v Brighton and Hove City Council Admn 2-Nov-2004
Application for judicial review, seeking an order quashing a grant of planning permission dated by the defendant for the demolition of an existing house and its replacement by eight self-contained apartments. The notice granting planning permission . .
CitedOxfordshire 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, . .
CitedMachado v Secretary of State for the Home Deptment CA 19-May-2005
At issue was a decision of the Home Secretary to deport on grounds of public policy a foreign national married to an EU national with a right of establishment in the United Kingdom. The substantive issue was whether the decision of the IAT to uphold . .
CitedGreen, Regina (on the Application of) v South West Strategic Health Authority Admn 28-Oct-2008
The claimant said that whilst resident in a care home, her care should have been paid for as health care under ‘Continuing Health Care.’ She said that the decision maker had failed to comply with the Health Authorities guidelines.
Held: In . .
AppliedLeung v Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine Admn 5-Jul-2002
Silber J considered the circumstances in which it was proper to take into account additional evidence surrounding the circumstances in which a decision under challenge had been made. He added to those in Ermakov the issue of whether it would be just . .
CitedRegina (Ashbrook) v East Sussex County Council CA 20-Nov-2002
The claimant complained that the respondent had failed properly to secure removal of an admitted obstruction to a public footpath. The landowner had applied for a diversion of the footpath, which the respondent recommended for adoption, but the . .
CitedClive Rees Associates, Solicitors, Regina (on The Application of) v Swansea Magistrates Court and Another Admn 30-Nov-2011
The claimant solicitors challenged a decision of the respondents to transfer legal aid orders for the representation of clients to a second frm of solicitors.
Held: The court considered the various cases, finding three decisions unlawful and . .
CitedNzolameso v City of Westminster SC 2-Apr-2015
The court was asked ‘When is it lawful for a local housing authority to accommodate a homeless person a long way away from the authority’s own area where the homeless person was previously living? ‘ The claimant said that on applying for housing she . .
CitedChief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills v The Interim Executive Board of Al-Hijrah School CA 13-Oct-2017
Single Sex Schooling failed to prepare for life
The Chief Inspector appealed from a decision that it was discriminatory under the 2010 Act to educate girls and boys in the same school but under a system providing effective complete separation of the sexes.
Held: The action was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Judicial Review

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.88304

Drake v Whipp: CA 30 Nov 1995

The parties, an unmarried cohabiting couple, disputed their respective shares in a property held in the man’s sole name. Both had made direct contributions both to the purchase of a barn and to its expensive conversion into a home. The plaintiff appealed against a finding that she had only a 14.9% interest on a resulting trust, in the house she and the defendant had occupied together. The property had been purchased for andpound;61,000 of which she had contributed andpound;24,000, with later additional contributions to conversion works. She complained that working on a resulting trust, the costs of acquisition were given undue emphasis.
Held: A beneficial interest in a family home could be presumed from the intention of the parties and their acting in detriment. There was a constructive trust. There was undisputed evidence that she was to have an interest in the property, and she had acted to further that intention and to her detriment. The appeal was allowed, and her interest set at one third. ‘it is not easy to reconcile every judicial utterance in this well-travelled area of the law. A potent source of confusion, to my mind, has been suggestions that it matters not whether the terminology used is that of the constructive trust, to which the intention, actual or imputed, of the parties is crucial, or that of the resulting trust which operates on a presumed intention of the contributing party in the absence of rebutting evidence of actual intention.’

Judges:

Peter Gibson LJ, Lord Justice Hirst and Mr Justice Forbes

Citations:

Times 19-Dec-1995, [1996] 2 FCR 296, [1995] EWCA Civ 25, (1996) 28 HLR 531, [1996] CLY 5780

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedLloyds Bank plc v Rosset HL 29-Mar-1990
The house had been bought during the marriage but in the husband’s sole name. The plaintiff’s charge secured the husband’s overdraft. The bank issued possession proceedings. Mr Rosset had left, but Mrs Rosset claimed, as against the bank an interest . .
CitedDyer v Dyer 27-Nov-1988
Where property is purchased by one person in the name of another there is a presumption that a resulting trust is created: ‘The clear result of all the cases, without a single exception is that the trust of a legal estate, whether freehold, copyhold . .

Cited by:

CitedOxley v Hiscock CA 6-May-2004
The parties were not married, but had brought together their resources to purchase a home in the name of one of them. Nothing had been said about the respective shares on which the property was to be held.
Held: The shares were to be assessed . .
CitedStack v Dowden HL 25-Apr-2007
The parties had cohabited for a long time, in a home bought by Ms Dowden. After the breakdown of the relationship, Mr Stack claimed an equal interest in the second family home, which they had bought in joint names. The House was asked whether, when . .
CitedJones v Kernott SC 9-Nov-2011
Unmarried Couple – Equal division displaced
The parties were unmarried but had lived together. They now disputed the shares in which they had held the family home. It had been bought in joint names, but after Mr Kernott (K) left in 1993, Ms Jones (J) had made all payments on the house. She . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts, Housing, Family

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.80130

London Borough of Waltham Forest v Marshall: UTLC 3 Feb 2020

HOUSING – CIVIL PENALTY – Housing Act 2004 – licences for rented property – financial penalty notice – the approach to be taken by courts and tribunals on appeals from decisions taken by a local authority in accordance with a lawful policy

Citations:

[2020] UKUT 35 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.651753

London Borough of Sutton v Swann: 30 Nov 1985

The defendant had applied to buy his council property, but lost his secure tenancy before completion of the purchase.
Held: He had lost the right to buy the property.

Citations:

(1985) 18 HLR 140, Times 30-Nov-1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLondon Borough of Haringey v Hines CA 20-Oct-2010
The authority sought rescission of a lease granted to the defendant under the right to buy scheme, saying that she had misrepresented her occupation when applying. The tenant replied that no adequate evidence had been brought that she was not a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.425498

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 house in accordance with Part VII of the Housing Act 1996.

Judges:

Plender J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 817 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDavy v Spelthorne Borough Council HL 13-Oct-1983
Although section 243(1)(a) provides that the ‘validity’ of an enforcement notice is not to be questioned except as therein provided, the word ‘validity’ is evidently not intended to be understood in its strict sense. It is used to mean merely . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Housing, Local Government

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.346236

AB v Leicester City Council: CA 19 Feb 2009

Appeal from an order dismissing an appeal by the person who has become known in these proceedings as AB, against a review decision to the effect that AB was not eligible for homeless assistance from the respondent, Leicester City Council. That review decision was taken in respect of the application that had been made by AB for homelessness assistance.

Judges:

Mummery LJ, Collins LJ, Rimer LJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 192

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.326977

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 other function. The landlord’s notice was sufficient. The court should then have considered as regards the claim of late payment of rent whether it was reasonable to make an order for possesson, the tenant being, by virtue of a late payment now in credit. There was no reason to interfere with what was an exercise of discretion by the judge. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Judge, May LJJ

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1402, [1999] 2 EGLR 13

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 48(1), Housing Act 1988 7(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDallhold Estates (UK) Pty Ltd (In Administration) v Lindsey Trading Props Inc CA 15-Dec-1993
The landlord is to provide a service address if an agricultural tenancy includes a dwelling, but relief from the consequences of non compliance with section 48(1) may be obtained by service of an appropriate notice. Immaterial misdescriptions or . .
CitedRogan v Woodfield Building Services Ltd CA 10-Aug-1994
The duty placed on a Landlord by the section is to give to the tenant a notice of an address for service for the landlord in writing. Stuart Smith LJ said: ‘what the section requires is that the tenant is told, so that he knows, the landlord’s name . .
CitedMarath 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 . .
See AlsoMorgan v Hamid-Zadeh CA 15-Sep-1998
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.146317

Dublin City Council v Gallagher: 11 Nov 2008

(High Court of Ireland) The defendant’s son claimed that he sought to succeed to a tenancy on his mother’s death. The council rejected the claim and served him with proceedings under Section 62 of the Housing Act 1966 to recover possession. The district judge had found that save for a period when he resided with his partner, he had resided with his mother and regarded the dwelling as his permanent residence.
Held: The absence of the procedures led to the conclusion that Section 62 violated the son’s Article 8 rights because of the lack of procedural safeguards. There was a breach of Article 6 in the process carried out internally by the council. Unlike McCann, there was a determination of the son’s rights by the council insofar as it made the decision that he was not entitled to succeed to the tenancy. There was no appeal for this decision within the decision making structures of the council and the issue could not be opened up again in the Section 62 proceedings. The restricted application of Article 6, as evidenced in McCann, was to be contrasted with the wide-reaching implicit guarantee of fair procedures in decision making by public bodies under the Irish constitution.

Judges:

O’Neill J

Citations:

[2008] IEHC 354

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMcCann v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-May-2008
The applicant and his wife were secure joint tenants of a house of a local authority under section 82. Their marriage broke down, and the applicant’s wife moved out of the house with the two children of the marriage. She returned after obtaining a . .

Cited by:

CitedCoombes, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another Admn 8-Mar-2010
The landlord council brought proceedings for possession. The tenant (C) had remained in possession after his mother’s death, but enjoyed no second statutory succession. He had lived there since 1954 when he was six. C sought a declaration of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Housing, human Rights

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.414889

Donegan v Dublin City Council and Others: 8 May 2008

(High Court of Ireland) The council had sought possession of its tenant. The agreement contained a clause allowing the council to terminate on four-weeks’ notice. It said the tenant’s son misused drugs. Section 62 of the Housing Act 1966 established a summary procedure allowing a public authority landlord a warrant for possession without any defence or factual dispute being considered.
Held: Laffoy J said that the tenant’s case fell squarely within the core principles established by the judgments of the ECHR and was an exceptional case.
Judicial review was inadequate as a remedy because it did not address any dispute as to the facts: ‘Accordingly, in the light of the decisions of the ECHR in Connors and Blecic the procedure provided for in s. 62, under which a warrant for possession is issued by the District Court against the tenant of a housing authority on the grounds of breach of the tenant’s tenancy agreement, without affording the tenant an opportunity where there is a dispute as to the underlying facts on which the allegation is based to have the decision to terminate reviewed on the merits, by the District Court or some other independent tribunal, cannot be regarded as proportionate to the need of the housing authority to manage and regulate its housing stock in accordance with its statutory duties and the principles of good estate management.’
A declaration of incompatibility was made under Section 5 of the Human Rights Act 2003.

Judges:

Laffoy J

Citations:

[2008] IEHC 288, 2005 3513 P

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMcCann v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-May-2008
The applicant and his wife were secure joint tenants of a house of a local authority under section 82. Their marriage broke down, and the applicant’s wife moved out of the house with the two children of the marriage. She returned after obtaining a . .

Cited by:

CitedCoombes, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another Admn 8-Mar-2010
The landlord council brought proceedings for possession. The tenant (C) had remained in possession after his mother’s death, but enjoyed no second statutory succession. He had lived there since 1954 when he was six. C sought a declaration of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.414888

Newham London Borough v Patel: 1978

Section 189 of the Housing Act, which compels a local authority to serve a repair notice wherever they are satisfied that a house is unfit within the meaning of section 604, unless the house is beyond repair, may result in the lawful service of notices in relation to defects which fall short of breaches of the section 11 covenant.

Citations:

(1978) 13 HLR 77

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 189 604(1), Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHussain v Mehlman CC 5-Mar-1992
(County Court) The defendant landlord granted the plaintiff a three year assured shorthold tenancy. He now appealed a finding that he was in breach of an implied covenant to maintain the space heating, and otherwise. The tenant had returned the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.258843

Wilson-Webb v The Kensington and Chelsea RLBC: 16 Jun 1998

(County Court)

Citations:

LAG 16-Jun-1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSlater v London Borough of Lewisham CA 12-Apr-2006
The applicant was heavily pregnant when she was offered a first floor one bedroomed flat. She rejected it.
Held: When a housing authority reviewed its decision on the applicant’s decision not to accept the accommodation offered, that review . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.242608

Regina v Brighton and Area Rent Tribunal Ex parte Slaughter: CA 1954

Citations:

[1954] 1 QB 446

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

MentionedPirabakaran v Patel and Another CA 26-May-2006
The landlord had wanted possession. The tenant said that the landlord had been harassing him. The landlord said that the tenancy was a mixed residential and business tenancy and that the 1977 Act did not apply.
Held: The 1977 Act applied. A . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.242243

Regina (on the application of Ouji) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: 2002

The court was concerned to interpret s122(4) of the 1999 Act relating to ‘essential living needs’. Basic support and basic essential needs by reference to non-disabled asylum seekers would be provided by the Secretary of State under the 1999 Act, but that any additional support needed as a result of disabilities would be provided by local authorities under s21 of the 1948 Act.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1839 (Admin

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948, Immigration and Asylum Act 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina (on the Application of A) v National Asylum Support Service, London Borough of Waltham Forest CA 23-Oct-2003
A family of asylum seekers with two disabled children would be destitute without ‘adequate’ accommodation. What was such accommodation?
Held: The authority was under an absolute duty to house such a family. In satisfying such duty, it was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Housing, Immigration

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.187179

Tormes Ltd v Landau: 1971

Citations:

[1971] 1 QB 261

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina, Ex Parte Spath Holme Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and The Regions, Secretary of State For Wales CA 20-Jan-2000
Regulations made to ease the effect of changes on the calculation of registered rents were ultra vires and void. The Act under which they were made was intended to control inflation. The purpose of these Regulations was to ease the effect on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.180400

Mountview Court Properties v Devlin: 1970

Citations:

(1970) 21 P and CR 689, [1971] CLY 10036

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina, Ex Parte Spath Holme Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and The Regions, Secretary of State For Wales CA 20-Jan-2000
Regulations made to ease the effect of changes on the calculation of registered rents were ultra vires and void. The Act under which they were made was intended to control inflation. The purpose of these Regulations was to ease the effect on . .
CitedCrake v Supplementary Benefits Commission; Butterworth v Supplementary Benefits Commission 1982
The claimants lived in the same house. The woman had severe injuries, and her male friend had at one time moved into the house to assist her care. She later moved to live with him, leaving her husband. There was no sexual relationship. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.180401

Croydon London Borough Council v Kalonga: QBD 2 Jun 2020

The court was asked whether the landlord could seek possession of a property granted under a five year flexible tenancy. There was no straightforward forfeiture clause. The landlord alleged rent arrears and anti-social behaviour.
Held: Without a forfeiture clause in the lease, the lease could not be determined before its expiry.

Judges:

Tipples J

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1353 (QB), [2020] WLR(D) 319

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 82

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.651238

London Borough of Lambeth v Rogers: CA 29 Oct 1999

The principal point on this appeal is this : in what circumstances is a local authority liable to a former secure tenant, against whom it has obtained, but not enforced, a possession order, for disrepair of the premises in the tolerated occupation of the former tenant ?

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 3035, [2000] 1 EGLR 28, (2000) 32 HLR 361, [2000] 03 EG 127, [2000] L and TR 319, [2000] BLGR 191, [1999] EG 128

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.346270

Defence Estates v JL and Another: Admn 5 May 2009

The claimant, which is responsible for managing property belonging to the Ministry of Defence (including residential property), to house members of the Armed Forces and their families, seeks possession of premises in Leeds in which the defendant and members of her family are living, and the claimant also seeks damages for use and occupation.

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1049 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Armed Forces, Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.346707

Weaver v London Quadrant Housing Trust: CA 17 Feb 2009

The respondent sought leave to appeal against a finding that as a registered social landlord it was exercising a public function and was a hybrid public authority.
Held: Leave was granted. A protective costs order was made for the respondent to ensure proper representation of both sides before the court.

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 235, [2009] 6 Costs LR 875

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At First InstanceWeaver, Regina (on the Application of) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust Admn 24-Jun-2008
An assured tenant sought to challenge a possession order made for rent arrears. He said that as a public body the landlord had a duty under human rights law to pursue all posssible alternate solutions before seeking possession.
Held: The . .

Cited by:

Leave to appealLondon and Quadrant Housing Trust v Weaver, Regina; Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening CA 18-Jun-2009
The Trust appealed against a finding that in terminating an assured tenancy transferred to it from a local authority, it had acted as a hybrid public authority and was subject to controls under the 1998 Act.
Held: (Rix LJ dissenting). The . .
CitedE, Regina (On the Application of) v Governing Body of JFS and Another SC 14-Oct-2009
The claimant had successfully challenged the policy of the school as racially discriminatory. He now sought an ancillary order that the respondents should not be allowed to request their costs from the defendant’s appeal whatever the outcome, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights, Costs

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.324676

Tickner v Hearn: 1960

A temporary absence of a tenant who intends to return to live in the premises within a reasonable period will not deprive him of the protection of the Rent Acts, provided always that there is ‘a real hope coupled with the practical possibility of its fulfilment within a reasonable time.’ In this case the tenant was absent for six years in a mental hospital, but retained her tenancy. Her daughter and her furniture had remained in the flat.

Citations:

[1960] 1 WLR 1406

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.245818

Regina v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea ex p Bayani: 1990

The court set out authoritative guidance as to the scope of a reviewing court’s power to interfere on the ground of the insufficiency of inquiry by a local authority to whom a homelessness application had been made. Neill LJ said: ‘(1) The duty to make inquiries is to make such inquiries as are necessary to satisfy the authority … It follows therefore that as it is the authority which have to be satisfied the scope and scale of the inquiries is, primarily at least, a matter for them. But the introduction of the word ‘necessary’ indicates that there is a standard which those inquiries must observe. In other words, the inquiries must be those which are ‘necessary’ to enable the authority to make a decision. (2) If the court is to intervene by way of judicial review, it must be on the basis, as I see it, that the inquiries have not reached the required standard in the circumstances of the case . . . (3) In deciding how a reasonable authority would have acted and what inquiries they would have made in the circumstances, the court must have regard to the speech of Lord Brightman in R v Hillingdon LBC ex parte Puhlhofer [1986] AC 484 where he said . . ‘it is not, in my opinion, appropriate that the remedy of judicial review, which is a discretionary remedy, should be made use of to monitor the actions of local authorities under the Act save in the exceptional case . . Where the existence or non-existence of a fact is left to the judgment and discretion of a public body and that fact involves a broad spectrum ranging from the obvious to the debatable to the just conceivable, it is the duty of the court to leave the decision of that fact to the public body to whom Parliament has entrusted the decision-making power save in a case where it is obvious that the public body, consciously or unconsciously, are acting perversely’ ‘.

Judges:

Neill LJ

Citations:

(1990) 22 HLR 406

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Gravesham Borough Council ex parte Winchester 1986
The court considered the nature of the assessment required of a housing auithority when application was made by a person claiming to be homeless. Simon Brown J said: ‘The duty to make necessary inquiries is not a duty to make all inquiries in fact . .
CitedRegina v Hillingdon London Borough Council Ex parte Puhlhofer HL 2-Jan-1986
Not Homeless Even if Accomodation Inadequate
The applicants, a married couple, lived with a young child and later also a baby in one room of a guest house. They were given breakfast but had no cooking or washing facilities. They succeeded on a judicial review of the housing authority’s . .
CitedRegina v Nottingham City Council ex parte Costello 1989
The court considered the nature of the duty to make inquiries imposed on a local authority faced with a homelessness application: ‘The duty to make necessary inquiries is not a duty to make all inquiries in fact necessary before the truth can be . .

Cited by:

CitedCramp 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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.229852

Lord and Another v Jessop: CA 21 Apr 1999

The defendant appealed an award of damages for breach of a covenant for quiet enjoyment. He said there had been a licence only.
Held: The defendant was not to be allowed to admit fresh evidence on appeal. Appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1228

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedLadd v Marshall CA 29-Nov-1954
Conditions for new evidence on appeal
At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.146143

Highland Council (Formerly Ross and Cromarty District Council) v Patience and Others (Scotland): HL 14 Nov 1996

Local Authority tenants sought to exercise their statutory right to purchase their council house. The third defendant had registered against the title a right of pre-emption protecting a feu charter registered in the Registry of Sasines.
Held: A Local Authority could sell a house to a secure tenant despite a feu charter on the title giving a right of pre-emption. The right to buy was akin to a compulsory purchase. The procedure involved clearly suggested that the tenant’s right to buy must be unimpeded.

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Griffiths, Lord Mustill, Lord Steyn, Lord Clyde

Citations:

Times 09-Jan-1997, [1996] UKHL 7

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Housing (Scotland) Act 1987

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

CitedKirkness v John Hudson and Co Ltd HL 1955
Viscount Simonds said: ‘the beliefs or assumptions of those who frame Acts of Parliament cannot make the law’. While subsequent legislation could resolve ambiguity in earlier legislation, it could only do so where the subject of the subsequent . .
CitedHenderson v City of Glasgow District Council 1994
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government, Land, Registered Land

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.135036

Regina v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (ex parte Kujtim): CA 31 Mar 1999

A person had been assessed by the local authority under section 47 as being a person in urgent need of care and attention which was not otherwise available to him, so that he satisfied the criteria laid down in section 21(1)(a). He claimed that, following that assessment, the local authority had to meet these needs by providing accommodation until, upon a reassessment, it was decided that his needs had changed.
Held: The argument succeeded. The contrary argument, that this was no more than a ‘target’ duty in the sense of the label used in R v Inner London Education Authority, Ex p Ali in relation to the Education Act 1944, was rejected: ‘Once a local authority has assessed an applicant’s needs as satisfying the criteria laid down in section 21(1)(a), the local authority is under a duty to provide accommodation on a continuing basis so long as the need of the applicant remains as originally assessed, and if, for whatever reason, the accommodation, once provided, is withdrawn or otherwise becomes unavailable to the applicant, then (subject to any negative assessment of the applicant’s needs) the local authority has a continuing duty to provide further accommodation.’

Judges:

Potter L

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1153, (1999) 2 CCLR 340, [1999] 4 All ER 161

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 21(1)(a), National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990 47

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Inner London Education Authority, Ex parte Ali 1990
The broad duty imposed on a local education authority by section 8 ‘to secure that there shall be available for their area sufficient schools . . for providing primary education’ is a ‘target duty’. . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v London Borough of Barnet ex parte G; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte W; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte A HL 23-Oct-2003
The applicants sought to oblige the local authority, in compliance with its duties under the 1989 Act, to provide a home for children, and where necessary an accompanying adult.
Held: There were four hurdles for the applicants to cross. They . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Children

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.146068

Regina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett: CA 26 Feb 1999

A steep staircase in a house which might lead to an accident was not because of that fact a statutory nuisance. It was not directly prejudicial to health as required by the Act for liability.

Citations:

Times 09-Mar-1999, Gazette 31-Mar-1999, Gazette 10-Mar-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 869, [1999] 1 WLR 1170, (1999) 31 HLR 1102, [1999] Env LR 587

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part III

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett Admn 13-May-1998
The risk of an accident from a steep staircase to a disabled tenant was not a statutory nuisance. The possibility of an accident is not the same as a source of injury to health. Buxton LJ: ‘The limitation of the reach of this Statute to disease and . .
Appeal fromRegina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett Admn 13-May-1998
The risk of an accident from a steep staircase to a disabled tenant was not a statutory nuisance. The possibility of an accident is not the same as a source of injury to health. Buxton LJ: ‘The limitation of the reach of this Statute to disease and . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett Admn 13-May-1998
The risk of an accident from a steep staircase to a disabled tenant was not a statutory nuisance. The possibility of an accident is not the same as a source of injury to health. Buxton LJ: ‘The limitation of the reach of this Statute to disease and . .
Appealed toRegina v Bristol City Council ex parte Everett Admn 13-May-1998
The risk of an accident from a steep staircase to a disabled tenant was not a statutory nuisance. The possibility of an accident is not the same as a source of injury to health. Buxton LJ: ‘The limitation of the reach of this Statute to disease and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Nuisance

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.145784

Ali v Birmingham City Council: CA 14 Oct 2009

The tenant sought accomodation. The council offered him some but he refused it. The council wrote to explain the effect of a refusal. He now complained that since he could not speak English, the Council had not correctly informed him of the consequences.
Held: The section distinguished between the acts of informing and of notification. It must first inform the applicant, which implied some additional element of making sure the letter was understood, and if the accomodation was still refused, it must notify him, which was a lower standard. Nevertheless on the facts of the case, the council had fulfilled its duty.

Judges:

Lord Justice May, President, Lord Justice Wall and Lord Justice Moore-Bick

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 1279, Times 04-Nov-2009, [2010] PTSR (CS) 6, [2010] PTSR CS6

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 193

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedTomlinson and Others v Birmingham City Council SC 17-Feb-2010
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.377548

Gilboy, Regina (on the Application Of) v Liverpool City Council and Another: Admn 15 Oct 2007

The court was asked as to the compatibility of the 2004 Regulations with the 1988 and 1985 Acts.

Judges:

Stanley Burnton J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2335 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Demoted Tenancies (Review of Decisions) (England) Regulations 2004, Housing Act 1985, Housing Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.259853

Kerr v Stephens: CA 15 Feb 2006

The claimant sought a declaration that she had inherited her mother’s stautory tenancy in 1987. She alleged encroachment by the landlord and a failure to repair. The landlord denied that she actually lived there so as to attract the protection of the 1977 Act. She received housing benefit. She said she had been driven out temporarily by the landlord bringing in a family.
Held: The judge’s conclusions were ones plainly open to him on the facts, and the appeal was unsustainable.

Judges:

Buxton LJ, Jonathan Parker LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 187

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Rent Act 1977 2(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedBeck v Scholz CA 1953
The court faced ‘a jury question to be determined by applying ordinary common sense’. And ‘The question posed and to be answered by ordinary commonsense standards, is whether the particular premises are in the personal occupation of the tenant as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.240092

Gargett, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Lambeth: Admn 8 Apr 2008

The tenant applicant said that the authority had a power to make a discretionary housing payment to cover arrears of rent incurred after an increase.

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 663 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Act 2000, Discretionary Financial Assistance Regulations 2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromGargett, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Lambeth CA 18-Dec-2008
The applicant was an assured tenant receiving housing benefits. Her rent was increased to a level above what would normally be covered by benefits. She failed to notify the local authority. The court was asked whether local authorities may exercise . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Benefits

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.266507

McDonnell v Daly: 1969

The tenant objected to alternative accommodation offered by his landlord.
Held: The offered property was not suitable. The tenant was an artist and the new accommodation did not offer a space suitable as a studio.

Citations:

[1969] 3 All ER 851

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.260332

Langdon v Horton: 1951

First cousins, sharing a residence for purposes of convenience, were held not to qualify as a family so that one could inherit the tenancy on the death of the other.

Citations:

[1951] 1 KB 666

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFitzpatrick 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 . .
CitedMichalak v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 6-Mar-2002
The appellant had occupied for a long time a room in a house let by the authority. After the death of the tenant, the appellant sought, but was refused, a statutory tenancy. He claimed to be a member of the tenant’s family, and that the list of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.215913

Feld, Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster v London Borough of Barnet, Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster: CA 18 Oct 2004

The applicants sought housing as homeless people. After the refusal of their applications, they sought a review, and in due course a second review. That second review was conducted by the same officer who had conducted the first. The appellant asserted bias on the part of the head of the housing needs and resources of the local authority in conducting the review of the suitability of the accommodation offered to her as a homeless person.
Held: The question in each case is whether or not all the circumstances which have a bearing on the question whether the reviewing officers were biased would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility that they were not impartial. No suggestion was made that either reviewing officer was actually biased. The reviewing officer is not reviewing his or her own earlier decision but is starting afresh to review a second decision as to the suitability of the accommodation offered to the homeless person in the letter of offer made to him or her. Here there was no apparent bias, and the appeal by the local authorities was allowed.
‘Trained decision-makers should not be treated as inferior beings intellectually unable to approach the task with an open mind. The fair-minded and informed observer would have that in mind.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Mance Lord Justice Ward Jackson, Mr Justice Jackson

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1307, Times 26-Oct-2004, [2005] BLGR 411, [2005] HLR 9

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 202

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRuna 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 . .
CitedThe Secretary of State for Health, Dorset County Council v The Personal Representative of Christopher Beeson CA 18-Dec-2002
The deceased had been adjudged by his local authority to have deprived himself of his house under the Regulations. Complaint was made that the procedure did not allow an appeal and therefore deprived him of his rights under article 6.
Held: . .
CitedPorter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
CitedLawal v Northern Spirit Limited HL 19-Jun-2003
Counsel appearing at the tribunal had previously sat as a judge with a tribunal member. The opposing party asserted bias in the tribunal.
Held: The test in Gough should be restated in part so that the court must first ascertain all the . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Doody and Others HL 25-Jun-1993
A mandatory lifer is to be permitted to suggest the period of actual sentence to be served. The Home Secretary must give reasons for refusing a lifer’s release. What fairness requires in any particular case is ‘essentially an intuitive judgment’, . .

Cited by:

CitedSwash v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 26-Jul-2006
The appellant challenged refusal of the grant of leave to remain in the UK. The court was asked as to the approach to be adopted by the AIT on reconsideration of an appeal when it has concluded that there was an error of law in the original . .
CitedHeald and Others v London Borough of Brent CA 20-Aug-2009
The court considered whether it was lawful for a local authority to outsource the decision making on homelessness reviews. The appellants said that it could not be contracted out, and that the agent employed lacked the necessary independence and was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.216635

Braschi v Stahl Associates Co: 1989

(New York: Court of Appeals) The issue was as to the meaning of the New York City Rent and Eviction Regulations which provided that a landlord might not dispossess ‘either the surviving spouse of the deceased tenant or some other member of the deceased’s tenant’s family who has been living with the tenant.’
Held: (by a majority) ‘The intended protection against sudden eviction should not rest on fictitious legal distinctions or genetic history, but instead should find its foundation in the reality of family life. In the context of eviction, a more realistic, and certainly equally valid, view of a family includes two adult lifetime partners whose relationship is long term and characterised by an emotional and financial commitment and interdependence.’ A same-sex partner of the deceased tenant was, it was held, able to qualify if he could produce the necessary evidence.

Citations:

(1989) 544 NYS 2d 784

Jurisdiction:

United States

Cited by:

CitedFitzpatrick 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.215912

Regina v Brighton and Hove Council ex parte Nacion (2): CA 1 Feb 1999

The applicant sought review of a decision not to offer him temporary accomodation pending an appeal following a review of a refusal to offer him emergency accomodation. He had become homeless as a result of imprisonment.
Held: The section gave the authority a wide discretion which should be respected. The authority had acted lawfully.

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 688, (1999) 31 HLR 1095

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 202(30

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedAli v Westminster City Council; Nairne v Camden London Borough Council CA 24-Jul-1998
The County Court had no power to grant an interim injunction without statutory provision. No power existed either to order the Local Authority to provide accommodation to a homelessness applicant pending a decision on the review.
Held: . .
CitedRegina v Camden London Borough Council, Ex Parte Mohammed Admn 23-May-1997
A local authority’s policy of not giving interim accommodation, pending a review of their refusal of an application for housing assistance, was not unlawful. In exercising their discretion the authority have to balance the objective of maintaining . .
CitedRegina v Hillingdon London Borough Council Ex parte Puhlhofer HL 2-Jan-1986
Not Homeless Even if Accomodation Inadequate
The applicants, a married couple, lived with a young child and later also a baby in one room of a guest house. They were given breakfast but had no cooking or washing facilities. They succeeded on a judicial review of the housing authority’s . .

Cited by:

CitedC 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 . .
CitedLawer, Regina (on the Application of) v Restormel Borough Council Admn 12-Oct-2007
The applicant was joint tenant of a council property. She suffered domestic violence, and said she was advised by the local authority to surrender her tenancy on the basis that they would rehouse her. She did so. The authority refused to provide a . .
See AlsoRegina v Brighton and Hove Council ex parte Nacion CA 1-Feb-1999
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.145603

Abbott v Bayley: CA 20 Jan 1999

Appeal against award of damages for breach by landlord of covenant for quiet enjoyment and under the 1988 Act.
Held: The landlord’s appeal failed. ‘There is no fixed point at which it can be said that breaches of the covenant of quiet enjoyment become so serious as to constitute qualifying conduct for the purposes of s 27. Provided only and always that each of the specified preconditions of liability are found satisfied, then necessarily the claim for statutory damages succeeds. ‘

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 619

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988 27

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedSampson and Others v Wilson and Others CA 19-Apr-1995
A landlord’s estate management agent was not jointly liable with the Landlord for damages for acts of harassment of the tenant committed by the landlord. . .
CitedSampson v Wilson 1994
The court considered the dangers of a double award of damages for a landlord’s breach of his covenant for quiet enjoyment. . .
CitedJones and Lee v Miah and Another CA 9-Sep-1992
The landlord should be deemed to have been in possession of the land when calculating damages for unlawful eviction. The measure of damages ‘represents the financial advantage which the landlord has gained . . . and of which it is the purpose of . .
CitedTagro v Cafanec CA 1991
In a case of unlawful eviction, the only valuation evidence was that produced by the tenant and such evidence was not challenged by the landlord. The grounds of appeal included the contentions that the award of damages was excessive and bore no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.145534

Southward Housing Co-Operative Ltd v Walker and Another: ChD 8 Jun 2015

The court was asked as to the nature and effect of tenancies for life granted by fully mutual housing co-operatives and in particular how they can lawfully be brought to an end and a possession order obtained. The tenants sought a declaration of incompatibility in respect of section 80. The Co-operative was fully mutual and a registered ‘co-operative housing association’ and the tenancies were not assured. In particular it was said that the tenancies purported to create an uncertain term.
Held: The possession order had been competently made. The rule applying section 149 of the 1925 Act transforming the tenancy into a tenancy for 99 years was not dependent on that being the intention of the parties.

Judges:

Hildyard J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 1615 (Ch), [2015] 2 P and CR 13, [2016] 2 WLR 605, [2015] L and TR 32, [2015] WLR(D) 246

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 80, Housing Act 1988, Human Rights Act 1998, Law of Property Act 1925 149(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedAli Bhai and Another v Black Roof Community Housing Association Ltd CA 2-Nov-2000
The tenant appealed against a refusal of what he said was his right to buy the flat he occupied. The Housing Association respondent and arbitrator had said that the tenancy had been assured, not secure and that therefore no right to buy had existed. . .
CitedJoseph v Nettleton Road Housing Co-Operative Ltd CA 16-Mar-2010
The respondent was a mutual housing co-operative, and the claimant its tenant. The tenant kept a dog in the premises without the consent of the other tenants in breach of the terms of the lease. A notice to quit was served on him. His tenancy was . .
CitedBerrisford v Mexfield Housing Co-Operative Ltd SC 9-Nov-2011
The tenant appealed against an order granting possession. The tenancy, being held of a mutual housing co-operative did not have security but was in a form restricting the landlord’s right to recover possession, and the tenant resisted saying that it . .

Cited by:

CitedWatts v Stewart and Others CA 8-Dec-2016
The court considered the status of residents of almshouses, and in particular whether they were licensees or tenants with associated security.
Held: The occupier’s appeal failed: ‘We do not accept the proposition that, if and insofar as Mrs . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.547603

Ariemuguvbe, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Islington: Admn 24 Feb 2009

The issue in this judicial review is whether Islington London Borough Council were entitled to ignore the claimant’s adult children, who are subject to immigration control, when considering the allocation of accommodation under Part VI of the Housing Act 1996. In particular, the question arises as to whether Islington Council may conclude that the claimant’s adult children are not part of her household under their allocation policy.

Judges:

Cranston

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 470 (Admin), [2009] PTSR CS39

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Immigration

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.324651

Kilby, Regina (on the Application of) v Basildon District Council: CA 22 May 2007

The court was asked whether a local authority can lawfully bind itself by contract to subject the exercise of its statutory power to vary its tenancy agreements by notice to the approval of tenants’ representatives.
Held: The local authority could not fetter its right in that way. The authority had a statutory power of management under section 21 of the Housing Act 1985 which was exercisable ‘for the single purpose of regulating secure periodic tenancies’ and that a contractual clause preventing it exercising its right of unilateral variation was ‘simply incompatible with the Council’s statutory right and power to vary their tenancies unilaterally.’
Rix LJ said: ‘The need for such a unilateral method of varying tenancies can be readily acknowledged. A local authority may have thousands of housing units. Circumstances, or changes of policy, may require it to be able to vary the terms of its tenancy. If such variation had to be sought severally and bilaterally, the local authority’s housing stock could become impossible to manage, in breach of its duty under section 21.’

Judges:

Buxton LJ, Rix LJ, Moses LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 479

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 21 103

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPeabody Trust v Reeve ChD 2-Jun-2008
The court was asked to sanction the unilateral alteration by the landlord of the terms of some ten thouand tenancies. The agreements contained a clause which the landlord said allowed for variations under the Housing Act 1985. The landlord was a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.252460

Aw-Aden v Birmingham City Council: CA 7 Dec 2005

When a council is considering whether an applicant for housing is a homeless person, the applicant’s appreciation of the prospects of future housing can be treated as ‘awareness of a relevant fact’ for the purposes of the sub-section, provided that it is sufficiently specific and provided that it is based on some genuine investigation and not mere aspiration.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1834

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedF 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.245874

Chios Property Investment Ltd v Lopez: 1987

When asked to consider whether a person cohabiting with a tenant before his death, and seeking a statutory tenancy after his death, the court stressed the importance of a ‘sufficient state of permanence and stability’ having been reached in the relationship so as to constitute a family. Cohabitation for two years still enabled the woman to qualify as a member of the tenant’s family. ‘ It was also argued that the absence of children and the shortness of the relationship should have resulted in a different conclusion. Counsel cited the very much longer periods in the reported cases referred to above. In my judgment, there can be no rule about length. Of course, the longer the relationship, the easier it will be to infer permanence, but there can be no rule about length. For a relationship of only two years to be regarded as permanent must be rare, but the judge for reasons which he gave found this was permanent and I see no reason for disagreeing. The appellants also submitted that there were periods of being apart, e.g. when the deceased was in Egypt and at holiday time, but I do not think that these made any difference. Finally, it was submitted that the fact that she still used her maiden name indicated that they did not constitute a family. This I found the most persuasive of all the appellants’ arguments, but at the end of the day the judge had to make a finding of fact bearing in mind the authorities I have quoted. He heard the evidence, he applied the right test and he came to the conclusion that this was a permanent relationship, so recognised by others, and that Miss Lopez was ‘a member of the tenant’s family’. I can see no reason for interfering with this conclusion . . ‘

Judges:

Sir George Waller

Citations:

(1987) 20 HLR 120

Statutes:

Rent Act 1977

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFitzpatrick 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 . .
CitedNutting v Southern Housing Group Ltd ChD 21-Dec-2004
The deceased tenant and the appellant had lived together in a violent alcoholic homosexual relationship. The appellant had claimed to have succeeded to the tenancy on his partner’s death. The authority said the relationship had been at an end, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.215908

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 not have capacity to own a legal estate, but may have an equitable tenancy. The Settled Land Act operated to create a trust and a settlement for the interest to be held for a child. Minors are capable of being persons in housing law. A minor can hold an equitable tenancy of any property, including a council house.

Judges:

Roch LJ, Hale DBE J

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 1891, (1999) 31 HLR 794

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 79 87 113(1), Law of Property Act 1925 1(1), Settled Land Act 1925 27(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedPortman Registrars v Mohammed Latif 1987
A minor can succeed to a statutory tenancy under the Rent Acts. A statutory tenancy is not an interest in land and a minor does have the capacity to contract for necessaries such as lodging. . .
CitedRegina v London Borough of Tower Hamlets ex parte Von Goetz CA 8-Oct-1998
A ten year shorthold tenancy agreement which was not executed under deed constituted an equitable interest, and since more than five years remained, the tenant had sufficient interest to found a claim for a council grant for renovation and repairs. . .
CitedKelly v Monklands District Council 1986
A local authority’s housing duties may be owed to a child if that child is living independently of its parents. . .
CitedHypo-Mortgage Services Limited v Robinson and Another CA 17-Nov-1996
The court refused parents leave to appeal against a mortgage possession order, rejecting their argument that children living with them had a beneficial interest in the mortgaged premises and were thus ‘in actual occupation’ so as to have overriding . .
CitedRegina v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Garlick and similar HL 19-Mar-1993
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Children, Trusts

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.145370

Bokhari v Redjep: CA 23 Nov 1998

The claimant appealed, saying that she had lost her action for possession when the judge had failed to allow her to amend her pleadings to add an allegation that the tenant ws using the premises for an immoral purpose, having been convicted of living off the proceeds of prostitution.
Held: The amendment would introduce an entirely new allegation of fact. The judge’s discretion was his to exercise and could not be said to have been exercised wrongly.

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 1815

Statutes:

Rent Act 1977

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.145294

Mohamed and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Waltham Forest: Admn 7 May 2020

Claims for judicial review raise, among other issues, an issue about the mental elements of the offence of having control of or managing a house in multiple occupation (‘HMO’) which is required to be licensed but which is not so licensed, contrary to section 72(1) of the Housing Act 2004

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1083 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Housing

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.650737

Ahmad, Regina (on the Application Of) v London Borough of Newham: CA 29 Feb 2008

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 140, [2008] BLGR 628, [2008] ACD 193

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 167

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromAhmad, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Newham HL 4-Mar-2009
The claimant wished to be rehoused by the defendant authority. He complained that their allocations policy was unlawful. Once an applicant was deemed in priority need, he entered a pool if such persons and houses were allocated (save in extreme . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.266012

London and Quadrant Housing Trust v Root: CA 12 Jan 2005

The tenant had a partner whom she could not control, and who had terrorised her to the nuisance also of her neighbours. The landlord sought possession, and until that was granted an anti-social behaviour order (ASBO) against the partner. Before the hearing an interim ASBO had been granted which effectively excluded the partner from the demised property, and that appears to have improved the situation. The Judge nonetheless made an outright order for possession against the tenant, and a final ASBO against her partner She appealed against an absolute possession order.
Held: The absolute possession order was upheld. The tenant said that the judge ‘ought to have considered first whether the ASBO provided appropriate protection and then gone on to consider whether, given the protection of the ASBO, he should nevertheless refuse to suspend the possession order’, on the basis that the ASBO ‘changed the position radically’. There had been ‘a total breakdown in the relationship’ between the tenant and landlord not only for the tenant’s partner’s nuisance but also because of the tenant’s refusal to give access:

Judges:

Brooke LJ, Longmore LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 43, [2005] HLR 439

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988 Sch2 p12 14

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedLambeth London Borough Council v Howard CA 6-Mar-2001
Any attempt to evict a person, whether directly or indirectly or by process of law, from his or her home is on the face of it a derogation from the respect to which the home is prima facie entitled. Courts should be careful fully to explain any . .

Cited by:

CitedKnowsley Housing Trust v McMullen CA 9-May-2006
The defendant tenant appealed an order for possession of her flat. She was disabled and living with her 19 year old son. He had been made subject to an anti-social behaviour order. The court had found that she could have required him to leave. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.222165