Category: Housing

Fernandes v Pavardin: CA 1982

The tenancy was granted as a protected tenancy under the 1977 Act. Before the grant L mentioned, but not in writing, that she might need the flat in the future for a member of her family. She now sought possession for a tenancy for her son. At first instance, the court found in her favour but declined to order possession under Case 9. Under Case 11 van order was granted on just and equitable grounds despite the defect of the notice not being in writing.
Held: T’s appeal failed. It was impossible to say that the judge had been wrong on his assessment of the justice of the case. There had been no misunderstanding and no inequity arose from his failure. The written notice was dispensed with. The court warned against taking the judgment as a precedent as to interpretation of Clause 11.
Stephenson LJ (dissenting) said that a failure to give the prescribed notice might be forgiven in circumstances wider than just where there was an absence of injustice and of inequity.

Judges:

Stephenson LJ

Citations:

[1982] 5 HLR 33, (1982) 264 EG 49

Statutes:

Rent Act 1977

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Minority preferred – Bradshaw v Baldwin-Wiseman 1985
When a landlord seeking possession of property subject to a statutory tenancy had failed to give the required written notice, the court could look to all the circumstances to decide whether that failure was to be forgiven and possession ordered. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.260334

Eastleigh Borough Council v Walsh: 1985

The court considered the nature of a tenancy created by the local authority when satisfying its duty to provide temporary accomodation pending a homelessness assessment. The agreement was described as a tenancy, and held to be one.

Citations:

[1985] 1 WLR 525

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Desnousse 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.242931

London Borough of Hackney v Lambourne: 1992

Ralph Gibson LJ said: ‘The defendants . . have no private law right to remain in occupation of the temporary premises let to them. Their private law right is to the accommodation which the council has, in the exercise of its discretion, judged to be suitable accommodation.’

Judges:

Ralph Gibson LJ

Citations:

(1992) 25 HLR 172

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Desnousse 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.242930

White v Westonhill Residents Association: UTLC 3 Jul 2019

Park Homes – Site Rules – whether a rule that no person under the age of 45 may reside on a protected site may be introduced at the discretion of the site owner using the procedure in the Mobile Homes (Site Rules) (England) Regulations 2014 – whether such a rule capable of being introduced only by agreement – meaning of ‘management and conduct of the site’ in section 2C(2), Mobile Homes Act 1983 – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2019] UKUT 210 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.640519

Muse v London Borough of Brent: CA 19 Dec 2008

The court was asked whether the section 193 duty to provide housing was lost after the applicant had refused alternative temporary accommodation. The applicant had been granted temporary accommodation, but her family grew and it became too small. She was offered an alternative but preferred to stay where she was.
Held: The Authority’s appeal succeeded. Though the effect was harsh, it followed from the words of the Act. Arden LJ said: ‘Finding temporary accommodation for an applicant does not discharge the duty of the housing authority. However, the duty is discharged if the applicant is offered temporary accommodation but ceases to be eligible for assistance, or becomes homeless intentionally from that accommodation, or finds permanent accommodation, or voluntarily ceases to occupy the accommodation made available to him as his only or principal home (section 193(6)). The housing authority also ceases to be subject to a duty to the applicant in the circumstances set out in section 193(5) . . and they are said to be the circumstances which are applicable in Mrs Muse’s case. ‘

Judges:

Pill LJ, Arden LJ, Aikens LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1447

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 193(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Birmingham City Council v Aweys and others CA 7-Feb-2008
If accommodation is not reasonable for a person to occupy, it is not suitable for him. Arden LJ said: ‘homelessness is a large social problem directly and substantially affecting the lives of many people in the UK, and those who depend on them, . .
Cited – Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua HL 6-Jul-1995
The term ‘Accommodation’ in the Act was to be read to include short term lettings, and was not to be restricted to secure accommodation, and the loss of such accommodation can be counted as intentional homelessness. If a person who had been provided . .
Cited – Griffiths v St Helens Council CA 7-Mar-2006
The applicant had been agreed to be homeless with priority need, and had been provided with an assured shorthold tenancy.
Held: The Legislation now allowed broadly three classes of accomodation as suitable: (1) accommodation owned by the local . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278982

Barry v London Borough of Southwark: CA 19 Dec 2008

The claimant a citizen of the Netherlands, appealed against the refusal to grant him housing assistance. He had been unemployed save for taking casual work during the Wimbledon championships, but the Authority had denied that he was a worker. He had also suffered an injury preventing him working.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The term ‘worker’ must not be interpreted restrictively. The court should have considered his employment history as a whole when considering the last six months’ period and in any event the work at Wimbledon should have been accepted as such.

Judges:

Arden LJ, Thomas LJ, Lloyd LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1440

Links:

Bailii, Times

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 202, Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Eligibility) (England) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006 No 1003), Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006 No 1294)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – DM Levin v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie ECJ 23-Mar-1982
ECJ The concepts of ‘worker’ and ‘activity as an employed person’ define the field of application of one of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty and, as such, may not be interpreted restrictively.
Cited – Kempf v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie ECJ 3-Jun-1986
The term ‘worker’ when used within community legislation should not be interpreted restrictively. . .
Cited – Deborah Lawrie-Blum v Land Baden-Wuerttemberg ECJ 3-Jul-1986
The Equal Treatment Directive is concerned with ‘workers’ which is a term of art in Community law: ‘That concept must be defined in accordance with objective criteria which distinguish the employment relationship by reference to the rights and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Immigration

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278973

(Un-named): SSCS 28 Jul 2008

‘the issue is whether the accommodation let by the landlord, Golden Lane Housing Ltd (‘GLH’), to the claimant tenant was at the material time ‘exempt accommodation’ – i.e. accommodation ‘provided by a non-metropolitan county council . . a housing association, a registered charity or voluntary organisation where that body or a person acting on its behalf also provides the claimant with care, support or supervision.’

Citations:

[2008] UKSSCSC CH – 1246 – 2007

Links:

Bailii

Housing

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278703

Allen v London Borough of Lambeth: CA 19 Jun 2008

Renewed application for permission to appeal. The claimant tenant insisted on paying his rent in cash. The council refused it and brought five sets of proceedings for possession. Each failed.
Held: The appeal should proceed.

Judges:

Rimer LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 966

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Torts – Other

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.278243

Wandsworth London Borough Council v Whibley: CA 14 Nov 2008

Appeal against possession order in respect of tenant with security under the 1985 Act who had twice been convicted of growing cannabis at the house, and was in arrears of rent.
Held: The council’s appeal against refusal of an order for summary possession. The Act gave the court the power to postpone an order for possession. The decision to fix a date for the portponment was to be made on the basis of bare assertion or denial by either party. Here the authority had not established that a breach of the postponed order had taken place.

Judges:

Tuckey LJ, Sedley LJ, Lawrence Collins J

Citations:

[2008] NPC 123, [2009] 1 P and CR DG9, [2008] EWCA Civ 1259

Links:

Bailii, Times

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 85(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277863

Kay And Others v United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Oct 2008

Citations:

37341/06, [2008] ECHR 1193, [2011] HLR 13

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Citing:

Welcomed – Doherty and others v Birmingham City Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local authority can obtain a summary order for possession against an occupier of a site which it owns and has been used for many years as a gipsy and travellers’ caravan site. His licence to occupy the site has come to . .

Cited by:

See Also – Kay And Others v United Kingdom ECHR 21-Sep-2010
(Fourth Section) After carefully considering the various views expressed in the House of Lords in Kay v Lambeth [2006] 2 AC 465 and Doherty v Birmingham [2009] 1 AC 367, and the relevant decisions of the Court of Appeal, the EurCtHR stated, at paras . .
Cited – Kennedy v The Charity Commission SC 26-Mar-2014
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277470

Rouse Tout A Tout, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Haringey: Admn 3 Apr 2012

The two linked claims challenge the lawfulness of a process known as ‘auto-bidding’ operated by the London Borough of Haringey as part of its scheme for allocating housing under Part VI of the Housing Act 1996.

Judges:

Underhill J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 873 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 Part VI

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.452480

Simms v London Borough of Islington: CA 16 Oct 2008

The applicant, a recovering drug addict sought assistance as a homeless person in priority need. He said that he was subject to a risk of relapse.
Held: The council had correctly applied the tests set out in Pereira and Osmani. They had been entitled to consider that he was not vulnerable within the section.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Moore-Bick and Lord Justice Rimer

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1083, Times 03-Dec-2008, [2009] HLR 20, [2008] NPC 109

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 189

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v London Borough of Camden ex parte Pereira CA 20-May-1998
When considering whether a person was vulnerable so as to be treated more favourably in applying for rehousing: ‘The Council should consider such application afresh applying the statutory criterion: The Ortiz test should not be used; the dictum of . .
Cited – Osmani v London Borough of Camden CA 16-Dec-2004
Auld LJ set out the test to be applied by an authority when deciding whether the applicant was vulnerable for the purposes of deciding whether to give priority housing assistance. The courts had recognised the difficult, involved nature of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276945

Ahmed, Regina (on the Application of) v Asylum Support Adjudicator and Another: Admn 2 Oct 2008

The claimant, a failed asylum seeker, sought judicial review of the refusal to him of accomodation

Judges:

Silber J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2282 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 4, Immigration and Asylum (Provision of Accommodation to Failed Asylum-Seekers) Regulations 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Housing

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276536

Regina v South Ribble Borough Council Housing Benefit Review Board, ex parte Hamilton: CA 24 Jan 2000

A statutory provision entitled a person to housing benefit if he had no income above a specified amount, and it had been previously decided that receipt of income support under the separate social security scheme, with its inbuilt rights of adjudication and appeal, bound those administering the housing benefit scheme to treat a person as having income below the specified amount. Mr Hamilton had however obtained income support by false statements.
Held: Income support obtained by fraud did not count for the purposes of entitlement to housing benefit. One reason was an express provision in the relevant regulations defining ‘a person on income support as a person lawfully in receipt of income support’, but another was the principle that ‘legislation should not be so construed as to enable a man to profit from his own wrong’:

Judges:

Henry, Robert Walker LJJ, Scott Baker J

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 518, (2001) 33 HLR 9

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council SC 6-Apr-2011
The land-owner had planning permission to erect a barn, conditional on its use for agricultural purposes. He built inside it a house and lived there from 2002. In 2006. He then applied for a certificate of lawful use. The inspector allowed it, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Housing

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276300

Dumbuya, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Lewisham: Admn 16 Jul 2008

Judges:

Walker J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1852 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Boxall v Waltham Forest Borough Council 2001
The fact that the claimants were legally aided was immaterial when deciding what, if any, costs order to make between the parties in a case where they were successful and he declined to order that each side should bear its own costs. The court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Judicial Review

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.272810

Birmingham City Council v Lee: CA 30 Jul 2008

Costs in a housing disrepair case: ‘The question which we have to consider arises where, on receipt of that notification, the landlord promptly carries out the repairs. If he does, that will remove from the tenant’s claim in the court action subsequently brought any application for specific performance of the repairing covenant, but will, very often, leave outstanding in that action only a claim for consequential damages. It may often be the case that if the landlord had not carried out the repairs, and thus the tenant had sued for specific performance as well as for consequential damages, the effect of the Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’) would have been that the action was allocated to the fast track. By contrast, if the action is for the consequential damages alone, because the repairs have now been done, the action will very often fall to be allocated to the small claims track. The issue for us is this: what if any order ought to be made in such a case as to pre-allocation costs? In particular, ought some order to be made which reflects the fact that until the repairs were carried out the tenant’s claim (notified under the protocol) was for specific performance as well as for damages, and would potentially have been for allocation to the fast track ?’

Judges:

Thomas, Hughes, Rimer LJJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 891, [2009] HLR 15, [2008] CP Rep 43

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedures Rules 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Birmingham City Council v Crook and others QBD 19-Jun-2007
Irwin J considered the enforceability of a conditional fee agreement in a test series of housing disrepair cases, recorded that he had been told that this Council almost always lost such claims brought against them, and had evidence about the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Housing

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271285

Warner v Lambeth London Borough Council: QBD 26 Mar 1984

A complaint of statutory nuisance laid before the magistrates must contain even if in summary form, similar details as would appear in an abatement notice, including the capacity in which the defendant is served and the steps required to be taken to abate the nuisance complained of. The defence available under section 99 was available to the land owner.

Citations:

Times 26-Mar-1984

Statutes:

Public Health Act 1936 99

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Carr v Hackney London Borough Council QBD 9-Mar-1995
The council tenant plaintiff alleged a statutory nuisance against the council in the form of condensation, damp and mould in his flat. When it came to the hearing the damp had abated. The magistrates asked whether it was likely to recur. The council . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Environment

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.450968

Gilboy, Regina (on the Application of) v Liverpool City Council and others: CA 2 Jul 2008

The court was asked whether the internal review procedure for reconsideration by local housing authorities of a decision to terminate a demoted tenancy established by sections 143E-143F of the Housing Act 1996 and the Demoted Tenancies (Review of Decisions (England) Regulations 2004 violates Article 6 of the Convention on Human Rights.

Judges:

Waller LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 751, Times 20-Aug-2008

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996, Demoted Tenancies (Review of Decisions (England) Regulations 2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270578

Jones v London Borough of Merton: CA 16 Jun 2008

The court was asked ‘If a former secure tenant of a dwelling-house who has become a ‘tolerated trespasser’ in it decides to cease to occupy it, does his liability to pay mesne profits to his former landlord in respect of the dwelling-house cease when he gives up possession of it or does it continue until, additionally, his former landlord is notified that he is no longer in possession of it?’
Held: The tenant’s appeal was allowed in part. He was ordered to pay rent for the period he was now found to have been in possession. ‘A tolerated trespasser is a former secure tenant against whom an order for possession has been made in which the specified date for him to give possession has passed but which has not been executed. ‘ The submission that a court can graft on to the law a requirement that the liability of a tolerated trespasser for mesne profits should continue until his giving not only of possession but also of notification was invalid. ‘for social landlords, the upshot is simple: distinguish between your tenant and your tolerated trespasser; monitor whether you wish (or, by order, are required) to continue to tolerate your tolerated trespasser; in particular, monitor his payment of sums equivalent to rent; and, if such come significantly into arrears, apply for a warrant of possession. For the rights of your tolerated trespasser will end upon execution of the warrant of possession; and, alternatively, if, on application by your tolerated trespasser, the court should stay or suspend execution or postpone the date of possession, you will know the terms upon which the court has tolerated continuation of his trespass. ‘

Judges:

Arden, Wall, Wilson LJJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 660, Times 03-Jul-2008

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Burrows v Brent London Borough Council HL 31-Oct-1996
The authority had obtained a possession order from its secure tenant but then agreed to accept payments toward the arrears. The tenant applied for and was granted a declaration that she had on that agreement acquired a new tenancy. The authority . .
Cited – Henderson v Squire 1869
The court considered the case where a tenant sublet the premises and the subtenant unlawfully retained possession following the termination of both tenancies.
Held: The tenant, although himself out of possession, had not given – or restored – . .
Disagreed with – John Laing Construction Ltd v Amber Pass Ltd ChD 7-Apr-2004
The landlord resisted the exercise of a break clause saying that the entire premises had not been vacated. The difference was as to whether mere vacation was enough, or whether the tenant had to do some further positive act. The tenant had left . .
Cited – Swordheath Properties Ltd v Floyd 1978
The rules relatng to the grant of immediate possession to a landowner as against squatters applied in the County Court just as much as in the High Court. The amount of damages payable by a trespasser on land is ordinarily the letting value of the . .
Cited – Southport Tramways Co v Gandy 1897
A former tenant who wrongfully remains in possession after the end of an ordinary tenancy ceases to be liable for mesne profits when he gives up possession, irrespective of notice. . .
Cited – Relvok Properties Ltd v Dixon CA 1972
A lease was assigned to a Mr Krokidis who then departed. The landlords instructed Estate Agents to change the locks. The defendants said that that amounted to a surrender of the lease.
Held: They were wrong: ‘In my judgment Judge Irving . .
Cited – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Others v Graham and Another HL 4-Jul-2002
The claimants sought ownership by adverse possession of land. Once the paper owner had been found, they indicated a readiness to purchase their interest. The court had found that this letter contradicted an animus possidendi. The claimant had . .
Cited – Bristol City Council v Hassan and Glastonbury CA 23-May-2006
The council had obtained possession orders for two properties from secure tenants, but the orders were suspended for so long as rent arrears were being discharged. The judges had understood that a date must appear on the possession order.
Cited – Harlow District Council v Hall CA 28-Feb-2006
The defendant had been subject to a possession order in respect of his secure tenancy. He was later adjudged bankrupt. He asserted that the bankruptcy specifically prevented other action to enforce the debt, and the suspended possession order was . .
Cited – Dunn v Bradford Metropolitan District Council etc CA 31-Jul-2002
The applicants were local authority secure tenants. Possession orders had been made, but they sought delay in the order after they had already surrendered possession.
Held: Parliament had given wide discretion to the courts to find a balance . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.269725

O’Connor and Another v Mayor and Burgesses of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: CA 30 Mar 2004

Judges:

Lord Justice Sedley Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 394, (2004) HLR 37

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 191

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – F v Birmingham City Council CA 2-Nov-2006
The applicant sought housing as a homeless person with her children. The authority found her in priority need, but intentionally homeless. Her appeal against the adverse review failed, and she appealed again. She had given up a council flat and had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.195037

Kadhim v Housing Benefit Board, London Borough of Brent: CA 20 Dec 2000

A lower court was not bound to follow a decision of a higher court, where the decision at issue had been based, on the relevant point, on an unargued assumption about the law, which had in turn been pivotal to the decision of that higher court: ‘The ratio decidendi of a case is any rule of law expressly or impliedly treated by the judge as a necessary step in reaching his conclusion, having regard to the line of reasoning adopted by him, or a necessary part of his direction to the jury.’ (Cross and Harris) ‘We therefore conclude, not without some hesitation, that there is a principle stated in general terms that a subsequent court is not bound by a proposition of law assumed by an earlier court that was not the subject of argument before or consideration by that court.’ Whether a person living in the same house as a relative was residing with him, was matter for ordinary English usage. The statute did not provide a full and exclusive definition, and the case remitted for reconsideration.
‘ Like all exceptions to, and modifications of, the strict rule of precedent, this rule must only be applied in the most obvious of cases, and limited with great care. The basis of it is that the proposition in question must have been assumed, and not have been the subject of decision. That condition will almost always only be fulfilled when the point has not been expressly raised before the court and there has been no argument upon it: as Russell L.J. went to some lengths in National Enterprises Ltd v Racal Communications Ltd to demonstrate had occurred in the previous case of Davies, Middleton and Davies Ltd v Cardiff Corpn 62 LGR 134. And there may of course be cases, perhaps many cases, where a point has not been the subject of argument, but scrutiny of the judgment indicates that the court’s acceptance of the point went beyond mere assumption. Very little is likely to be required to draw that latter conclusion: because a later court will start from the position, encouraged by judicial comity, that its predecessor did indeed address all the matters essential for its decision.’

Judges:

Buxton LJ, Schiemann LJ, Jacob J

Citations:

Times 27-Mar-2001, [2000] EWCA Civ 344, [2001] 2 WLR 1674, [2001] QB 955

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Scrivens v Ethical Standards Officer Admn 11-Apr-2005
The councillor appealed an adjudication that he had failed adequately to declare an interest at a meeting of the council. The officer thought the duty to withdraw was entirely objective, the applicant that it was a matter for his honest judgment. At . .
Cited – Coates v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 29-Jul-2011
The defendant appealed by case stated against his conviction for driving a Segway scooter on a footpath. He denied that it was ‘a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads.’
Held: The appeal failed. The district judge . .
Dicta approved – Youngsam, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board Admn 7-Apr-2017
The claimant challenged being recalled to prison from licence after being found in an area from which he was excluded as a condition of his parole. . .
Cited – Rawlinson and Hunter Trustees SA and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office CA 31-Jul-2014
Documents had been disclosed in error in related proceedings, and the appellants now challenged refusal of an order that their use within the current proceedings should be restrained. . .
Cited – FSHC Group Holdings Ltd v Glas Trust Corporation Ltd CA 31-Jul-2019
Rectification – Chartbrook not followed
Opportunity for an appellate court to clarify the correct test to apply in deciding whether the written terms of a contract may be rectified because of a common mistake.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge was right to conclude that an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Benefits, Housing, Litigation Practice

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.147377

Clarke, Regina (on The Application of) v Birmingham City Council: Admn 4 Jul 2019

Claim for judicial review of a decision of the Cabinet of the defendant council to confirm its decision approving an amended capital spending budget that included provision of some pounds 19m (out of an anticipated total of pounds 31m over three years) to fund the retro-fitting of sprinkler systems to all the tower blocks owned by the Council, in the wake of the fire at Grenfell Tower in London.

Judges:

David Cooke HHJ

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1728 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Housing

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.639690

Regina (Gangera) v London Borough of Hounslow: Admn 2003

The claimant challenged the Act as being an unlawful discrimination.
Held: The 1985 Act in allowing only one succession to a secure tenancy found a proper balance between the needs of the tenant’s family and the duty of a local housing authority to manage its housing stock in the interests of the locality and of those in greatest need: ‘Every secure tenant, whether sole or joint, is limited to one assignment or other transmission of the secure tenancy. The rule limiting succession to one transmission applies to all secure tenants equally.’
In proceedings between private parties the court does not act incompatibly with article 8 by making or enforcing a possession order without considering questions of proportionality, and it makes no difference that the landlord is a public authority.
Moses J said: ‘It is plain that Parliament had to strike a balance between security of tenure and the wider need for systematic allocation of the local authority’s housing resources in circumstances where those housing resources are not unlimited. The striking of such a balance is pre-eminently a matter of policy for the legislature. The court should respect the legislative judgment as to what is in the general interest unless that judgment was manifestly without reasonable foundation.’

Judges:

Moses J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 794, [2003] HLR 1028

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 87, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Coombes, 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 . .
Approved – Sheffield City Council v Wall (Personal Representatives of) and Others CA 30-Jul-2010
The claimant had been a foster son and was now the administrator of the estate of the deceased tenant. He sought to occupy the property as a successor under the 1985 Act. He said that as a former foster child, he had become a member of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.414887

Lee v Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council: CA 9 Apr 2008

Renewed application for permission to appeal from order dismissing the appellant’s appeal against a decision of the housing officer that certain accommodation offered to her had been suitable and that the authority had thus discharged the respondent’s housing duty under the Housing Act 1996.

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 523

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.267905

Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington: CA 22 Apr 2008

The claimant was a council tenant with the right to buy her property. A possession order was made, but then discharged.
Held: On the revival of the tenancy her right to buy and discount was also revived, and there was no need to serve a fresh notice.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Keene and Lord Justice Maurice Kay

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 363, Times 28-Apr-2008, [2008] 17 EG 162, [2008] L and TR 27, [2008] 4 All ER 459, [2008] NPC 53, [2008] 1 WLR 1350, [2008] 2 EGLR 133

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 124

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Burrows v Brent London Borough Council HL 31-Oct-1996
The authority had obtained a possession order from its secure tenant but then agreed to accept payments toward the arrears. The tenant applied for and was granted a declaration that she had on that agreement acquired a new tenancy. The authority . .
Appeal from – Islington London Borough Council v Honeygan-Green (Honeygan) QBD 25-May-2007
The court considered whether the determination of a secure tenancy by the granting of a possession order, brings to an end an existing application which has established the right to buy at a particular time and at a particular price, or whether such . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Knowsley Housing Trust v White; Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington; Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association HL 10-Dec-2008
The House considered situations where a secure or assured tenancy had been made subject to a suspended possession order and where despite the tenant failing to comply with the conditions, he had been allowed to continue in occupation.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.267005

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

The two applicants had occupied a women’s refuge. They appealed against a refusal to consider them as homeless when they acted in such a way as to be evicted from the refuge, saying that the refuge did not constitute ‘accommodation . . which it would have been reasonable for [them] to continue to occupy’. It was said for the Women’s Refuge movement that a decsion that a refuge was appropriate housing would disable the system because authorities would lose the obligation to house women.
Held: Women’s refuges no longer operated as in Sidhu: ‘where the enquiry is whether it would be (or, as in the present cases, would have been) reasonable for a woman to continue to occupy a refuge as opposed to other accommodation, particular matters fall to be considered in addition to the general matters which fall to be considered in any enquiry under s.175(3) or s.191(1) of the Act.’ The reviewing officer could not reasonably have come to any other decision.

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 378, Times 20-May-2008, [2008] 1 WLR 2387

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 175 193, Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v London Borough of Ealing Ex parte Sidhu 2-Jan-1982
The applicant, in flight from domestic violence, had gone with her two young children, to stay in a women’s refuge. The local authority argued that she was not homeless because she had accommodation available to her in the refuge.
Held: The . .
Cited – Re M (A Minor) (Care Orders: Threshold Conditions) HL 7-Jun-1994
The father had been sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of the child’s mother. Application was made for the child to be made subject to a care order. The father appealed refusal of an order.
Held: When an application was made on the . .
Cited – Din (Taj) v Wandsworth London Borough Council HL 26-Nov-1981
The appellants had applied for emergency housing as homeless persons, anticipating loss of their secure accomodation after falling into arrears. The Council reject their application, but a County Court quashed that decision. The Court of Appeal . .
Cited – Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua HL 6-Jul-1995
The term ‘Accommodation’ in the Act was to be read to include short term lettings, and was not to be restricted to secure accommodation, and the loss of such accommodation can be counted as intentional homelessness. If a person who had been provided . .
Cited – Regina 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 – Regina v Waveney District Council ex parte Bowers 25-May-1982
The applicant sought judicial review of a decision that he was not homeless under section 1 of the Act. For 15 months he had been using a night shelter in Lowestoft. It was an unheated dormitory in a derelict building. It was empty and closed . .
Cited – Birmingham City Council v Aweys and others CA 7-Feb-2008
If accommodation is not reasonable for a person to occupy, it is not suitable for him. Arden LJ said: ‘homelessness is a large social problem directly and substantially affecting the lives of many people in the UK, and those who depend on them, . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Birmingham City Council v Ali and Others; Moran v Manchester City Council HL 1-Jul-2009
Homelessness Status Requires LA Action
The House considered appeals challenging whether local authorities who gave unacceptable housing to the homeless had satisfied their obligations to them as homeless people. What was meant by the phrase ‘accommodation which it would be reasonable for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.266959

London Borough of Wandsworth v Allison: CA 15 Apr 2008

The claimant had applied for emergency housing, saying that he had suffered a deep vein thrombosis, and was vulnerable under the 1996 Act. The authority said that its finding that the VT would not put him at additional risk if homeless, was one of fact against which no appeal lay. The authority now appealing said that it wa wrong for the district judge to say that the medical evidence could not be said to support the finding.
Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘the decision that Mr. A was not in priority need of accommodation under section 189(1)(c) of the Act was one which was properly open to Ms A on the evidence. She was duty bound to weigh all the relevant evidence. She did so. She had to apply the Pereira test. She did so. Her first reference to it was immaculate: the second was criticised by the Recorder, but was found by him not to be material. She did not leave anything relevant out of account, or include in her consideration any material which was irrelevant. She was entitled to take into account the views of Dr Keen and to give them the weight she did.’

Judges:

Arden, Wall, Wilson LJJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 354

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 189(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina 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 – Begum (Nipa) v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council CA 1-Nov-1999
The fact that the accommodation found to be available to the applicant for housing was in Bangladesh did not make it unavailable in law. The subsections must be read separately. Accommodation could be available to the applicant even though she could . .
Cited – Regina v London Borough of Camden ex parte Pereira CA 20-May-1998
When considering whether a person was vulnerable so as to be treated more favourably in applying for rehousing: ‘The Council should consider such application afresh applying the statutory criterion: The Ortiz test should not be used; the dictum of . .
Cited – Griffin v Westminster City Council CA 28-Jan-2004
The claimant sought emergency rehousing saying that he was a vulnerable person within section 189. The court at first instance had overturned the rejection of his claim by the authority.
Held: The test set out in the statute was to be followed . .
Cited – Shala and Another v Birmingham City Council CA 27-Jun-2007
The claimants succeeded in their applications for asylum, and then applied for housing assistance. They now appealed refusal of such assistance. The issue was how the authority had treated their medical evidence in the review process. Mrs Shala was . .
Cited – London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Deugi CA 7-Mar-2006
The court considered whether a successful appeal against a local authority’s decision on the need for emergency housing should lead to the case being remitted to them for a further review. May LJ defined the question to be: ‘whether there was any . .
Cited – Osmani v London Borough of Camden CA 16-Dec-2004
Auld LJ set out the test to be applied by an authority when deciding whether the applicant was vulnerable for the purposes of deciding whether to give priority housing assistance. The courts had recognised the difficult, involved nature of the . .
Cited – Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation CA 10-Nov-1947
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably
The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal . .
Cited – Aribisala v St James’ Homes (Grosvenor Dock) Ltd ChD 14-Mar-2008
The claimant contracted to buy two apartments from the defendant. The contract purported to exclude section 49. . .
Cited – Khelassi v London Borough of Brent CA 7-Dec-2006
The court considered the use of medical expert evidence in applications for emergency housing. . .
Cited – Harper v Oxford City Council CA 2007
Application for leave to appeal against homelessness decision – refused. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.266799

S v Floyd, Equality and Human Rights Commission: CA 18 Mar 2008

The court considered the relationship between the two Acts. The assured tenant had fallen into arrears, and was subject to an order for possession. He claimed that his disability required the court not to make an order for possession against her, and that arrears of payable housing benefits would clear the debt.
Held: The appeal failed. There had been insufficient evidence of mental impairment to require an adjournment for the tenant to obtain assistance. The tenant had not himself raised at trial the issue of the relationship between the Acts and the power of the court to suspend or refuse and order for possession on te grounds of disability, and it was not obvious how the 1995 Act could operate to grant a defence: ‘The 1995 Act was enacted to provide remedies for disabled people at the receiving end of unlawful discrimination. It was not aimed at protecting them from lawful litigation or at supplying them with a defence to breach of a civil law obligation.’ The Romano case involved a discretionary ground for possession. This case did not.

Judges:

Mummery, Lawrence Collins, LJJ, Munby J

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 201, [2008] NPC 34, [2008] 1 WLR 1274

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995, Housing Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm and Disability Rights Commission CA 25-Jul-2007
The court was asked, whether asked to grant possession against a disabled tenant where the grounds for possession were mandatory. The defendant was a secure tenant with a history of psychiatric disability. He had set out to buy his flat, but the . .
Cited – North British Housing Association Ltd v Matthews, Same v Others CA 21-Dec-2004
In each case the tenants requested adjournment of the possession proceedings brought against them by the landlord for arrears of rent to allow them time to bring the arrears below the level at which a possession order could be made. In each case it . .
Cited – Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1) CA 19-Dec-2002
Capacity for Litigation
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claims. He had earlier settled a claim for damages, but now sought to re-open it, and to claim in negligence against his former solicitors, saying that he had not had sufficient mental capacity at the . .
Cited – Council of the City of Manchester v Romano, Samariz CA 1-Jul-2004
The authority sought to evict their tenant on the ground that he was behaving in a way which was a nuisance to neighbours. The tenant was disabled, and claimed discrimination.
Held: In secure tenancies, the authority had to consider the . .
Cited – Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold) CA 25-Mar-1999
The applicant had soft tissue injuries around the spine as a consequence of a back injury at work. He was absent from work for a long time as a result of his injuries, and he was eventually dismissed when his medical advisers could provide no clear . .
Cited – Council of the City of Manchester v Romano, Samariz CA 1-Jul-2004
The authority sought to evict their tenant on the ground that he was behaving in a way which was a nuisance to neighbours. The tenant was disabled, and claimed discrimination.
Held: In secure tenancies, the authority had to consider the . .
Cited – Taylor v OCS Group Ltd CA 31-May-2006
The employer appealed against findings of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The employee worked in IT. He was profoundly deaf, but could lip read and read sign language. He had been accused of obtaining improper access to a senior . .
Cited – Wright v Croydon London Borough Council 2007
A possession order had been obtained by the local authority, but the tenant later produced evidence that she was a diabetic dyslexic. Croydon did not at first enforce the possession order, until the arrears of rent began to increase again. The . .
Cited – London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm and Disability Rights Commission CA 25-Jul-2007
The court was asked, whether asked to grant possession against a disabled tenant where the grounds for possession were mandatory. The defendant was a secure tenant with a history of psychiatric disability. He had set out to buy his flat, but the . .

Cited by:

Cited – London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm HL 25-Jun-2008
Unrelated Detriment was no Discrimination
The tenant had left his flat and sublet it so as to allow the landlord authority an apparently unanswerable claim for possession. The authority appealed a finding that they had to take into account the fact that the tenant was disabled and make . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Discrimination

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.266214

Knight v Vale Royal Borough Council: CA 31 Jul 2003

The claimant challenged a decision of the authority that she had made herself intentionally homeless.She had gone to a refuge, then to stay with her mother. She had been found to be intentionally homeless. She then found a shorthold tenancy. When that was coming to an end the authority notified her that she remained intentionally homeless.
Held: The obtaining of the shorthold tenancy was capable of forming a break with whatever had happened beforehand, and that she had achieved a settled residence. It was not right to deduce from the fact that a maximum of six months only could be guaranteed that the accommodation was temporary, but such an occupation could not by law be a guarantee of having achieved a settled accommodation. It remained a question of fact and degree in the circumstances of each case.

Judges:

Pill, Laws LJJ, Sir Martin Nourse

Citations:

Times 04-Sep-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 1258, Gazette 02-Oct-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Hosuing Act 1996 184(6) 204

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua HL 6-Jul-1995
The term ‘Accommodation’ in the Act was to be read to include short term lettings, and was not to be restricted to secure accommodation, and the loss of such accommodation can be counted as intentional homelessness. If a person who had been provided . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.186103

McDonald v McDonald and Others: SC 15 Jun 2016

Her parents had bought a house and granted tenancies to their adult daughter (the appellant), who suffered a personality disorder. They became unable to repay the mortgage. Receivers were appointed but the appellant fell into arrears with the rent. The receivers began possession proceedings, and a possession order was made and confirmed. She appealed saying that the judge should have asked as to the proportionality of granting possession under article 8 and, had he done so may have refused to grant possession against her despite the apparently mandatory terms of section 21(4) of the 1988 Act and section 89(1) of the 1980 Act limiting any postponment of possession. The appellant said that the 1980 Act should be read to give a court the discretion to postpone a possession order.
Held: ‘This appeal raises three questions. The first is whether a court, when entertaining a claim for possession by a private sector owner against a residential occupier, should be required to consider the proportionality of evicting the occupier, in the light of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The second question is whether, if the answer to the first question is yes, the relevant legislation, in particular section 21(4) of the Housing Act 1988, can be read so as to comply with that conclusion. The third question is whether, if the answer to the first and second questions is yes, the trial judge would have been entitled to dismiss the claim for possession in this case, as he said he would have done.’
‘while we accept that the Strasbourg court jurisprudence relied on by the appellant does provide some support for the notion that article 8 was engaged when Judge Corrie was asked to make an order for possession against her, there is no support for the proposition that the judge could be required to consider the proportionality of the order which he would have made under the provisions of the 1980 and 1988 Acts.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath

Citations:

[2016] UKSC 28, [2016] HLR 28, [2016] HRLR 18, [2016] 3 WLR 45, [2016] 2 P andCR DG22, [2016] WLR(D) 312, [2017] AC 273, UKSC 2014/0234

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary

Statutes:

Housing Action 1980 89(1), Human Rights Act 1988 21(4), European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – McDonald v McDonald and Another CA 24-Jul-2014
The appellant had a personality dosorder. Her parents bought a house and granted her series of assured shorthold tenancies. After they fell into rrears on the morgtgage, the bank appointed receivers. The rent then also hell into arears, and they . .
Cited – Di Palma v United Kingdom ECHR 1-Dec-1986
(Commission/admissibility) The applicant’s lease was forfeited on her non-payment of a service charge and possession was ordered. Her primary claim was made (unsuccessfully) under article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention. But she also . .
Cited – Wood v United Kingdom ECHR 2-Jul-1997
(Commission decision as to admissibility) The applicant’s house had been repossessed by a mortgagee when she defaulted on her payments due under the mortgage. Her complaint was found to be manifestly ill-founded, saying ‘In so far as the . .
Cited – Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc CA 6-Jan-1999
The applicant’s property was charged to the defendant. At the time it was not occupied. The mortgage fell into arrears, and after serving notice at the property, the bank took posssession and sold the property at auction. The claimants said the bank . .
Cited – London Borough of Harrow v Qazi HL 31-Jul-2003
The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 9-Feb-2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . .
Cited – London Borough of Hounslow v Powell, Leeds City Council v Hall etc SC 23-Feb-2011
In each case the tenant occupied the property as his home, but was not a secure tenant of the local authority. The Court was asked whether, in granting a possession order in such a case, the court was obliged to consider the proportionality of the . .
Cited – Connors v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-May-2004
The applicant gypsies had initially been permitted to locate their caravan on a piece of land owned by a local authority, but their right of occupation was brought to an end because the local authority considered that they were committing a . .
Cited – McCann 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 – Cosic v Croatia ECHR 15-Jan-2009
The applicant teacher was provided a flat by her school, which it in had leased from the Yugoslavian Army. That lease expired in 1990. She remained, paying rent to the school. Ultimately the Croatian State, which had assumed ownership of Yugoslavian . .
Cited – Zehentner v Austria ECHR 16-Jul-2009
ECHR The applicant’s apartment was subject to a judicial sale for non-payment of debt. She was ill, and did not participate in the sale. The local law had time limits for challenging a judicial sale, designed to . .
Cited – Zrilic v Croatia ECHR 3-Oct-2013
. .
Cited – Orlic v Croatia ECHR 21-Jun-2011
. .
Cited – Buckland v The United Kingdom ECHR 18-Sep-2012
The applicant alleged that the Court of Appeal’s decision to dismiss her appeal and uphold the judgment making a possession order constituted an unjustified breach of her right to respect for her home and her family life and discriminated against . .
Cited – Brezec v Croatia ECHR 18-Jul-2013
. .
Cited – Pla and Puncernau v Andorra ECHR 13-Jul-2004
A will made by a widow in 1939, left certain property to her son Francesc-Xavier, as tenant for life, with a stipulation that he was to leave this inheritance to a son or grandson of a lawful and canonical marriage, failing which the estate was to . .
Cited – Belchikova v Russia ECHR 25-Mar-2010
. .
Cited – Khurshid Mustafa And Tarzibachi v Sweden ECHR 8-Jun-2011
The Strasbourg court considered a claim by applicants who had been evicted by a court order at the suit of their landlords, who had determined their tenancy for installing a satellite dish in breach of covenant.
Held: This infringed the . .
Cited – Lemo And Others v Croatia ECHR 10-Jul-2014
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.565402

M, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham: HL 27 Feb 2008

M, a girl aged 16 had become estranged from her mother, and sought housing assistance. She was not referred to the authority’s children’s services, and was not housed. The House examined the duties of local authorities under the section towards children aged 16 and 17 without support from their families. The 1989 Act referred to ‘a child who is looked after by a local authority’.
Held: ‘there is all the difference in the world between the services which an eligible, relevant or former relevant child can expect from her local children’s services authority, to make up for the lack of proper parental support and guidance within the family, and the sort of help which a young homeless person, even if in priority need, can expect from her local housing authority. ‘ Whilst her claim might have better been referred to the childrens serbices department by the Housing department to whom she applied, but they did not. ‘The claim is for the extra help and support available to former relevant children, even after they reach the age of 18, under section 23C of the 1989 Act. To be a relevant child, one must first have been an eligible child: section 23A(1). To be an eligible child one must have been ‘looked after’ by a local authority for the requisite period of time.’ Without having come to the attention of the Children’s Services department, the authority had not provided her with care sufficient for her to become a ‘relevant child’ within section 20.

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2008] UKHL 14, [2008] Fam Law 515, (2008) 11 CCL Rep 302, [2008] BLGR 159, [2008] 4 All ER 271, [2008] 1 WLR 535, [2008] 3 FCR 688, [2008] 1 FLR 1384

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 22(1), Housing Act 1996 Part VII

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – M, Regina (on the Application of) v Hammersmith and Fulham CA 5-Jul-2006
The court examined ‘a short but important point on the inter-relationship between the provisions of Part III of the Children Act 1989, headed ‘Local Authority Support for Children and Families’, and the homelessness provisions of Part VII of the . .
Cited – Regina 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 . .
Cited – Southwark, London Borough of v D CA 7-Mar-2007
The social worker arranged for D, unable to live with her father because he was violent towards her, to live with his fomer partner. The court was asked whether the local authority had simply facilitated a private fostering arrangement, in which . .
Cited – H and others v London Borough of Wandsworth and others Admn 23-Apr-2007
In three linked cases, unaccompanied asylum-seeking children had had assistance with housing from the local social services authorities. They claimed entitlement to support as former relevant children under section 20. The local authorities argued . .
Cited – S, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Sutton CA 26-Jul-2007
The local authority owed the section 20(1) duty towards a 17 year old girl who was about to be released from a Secure Training Centre. It argued however that the duty no longer applied because she had agreed to go to a hostel for homeless women . .
Cited – L, Regina (on the Application of) v Nottinghamshire County Council Admn 26-Sep-2007
A social worker arranged for L, a seriously troubled young person who had been evicted from her mother’s home, to live for a few days in an hotel.
Held: As she had previously been looked after by the local authority for some time, this would . .

Cited by:

Cited – G, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough Of Southwark HL 20-May-2009
The House was asked whether when a child of 16 or 17 who was ejected from home and presents himself to a local children’s services authority and asks to be accommodated by them under section 20 of the Children Act 1989, it is open to that authority . .
Cited – A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon SC 26-Nov-2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined.
Held: The claimants’ appeals . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Housing

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.265968

Wragg and others v Surrey County Council: CA 1 Feb 2008

The Council appealed against declarations given that the respondent tenants (wildlife rangers) were entitled to purchase the freehold of their homes under right-to-buy. The Council said that the tenancies were occupied in connection with their employments.
Held: Richards LJ said: the provision is to be construed as laying down two distinct conditions: first, that ‘his contract of employment requires him to occupy the dwelling-house’; secondly, that the requirement is ‘for the better performance of his duties’. The first condition looks only to the terms of the contract: the question is simply whether the contract contains such a requirement or not. The second condition, however, raises an issue of fact outside the contract: the question is not whether the contract states that the requirement is for the better performance of his duties, but whether the requirement is in fact for the better performance of his duties.’ and ‘The legislative policy behind the statutory provision must be to deny an employee security of tenure and the right to buy only in those cases where there is a real link between the requirement to occupy the property and the performance of the employee’s duties, such as to justify the employer recovering the property for use by subsequent employees when the present occupier’s employment comes to an end.’

Judges:

Pill, Moore-Bick, Richards LJJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 19

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 118 124

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Norris (t/a J Davis and Son) v Checksfield CA 17-Apr-1991
The employee occupied the property under a licence granted by his employer for the better performance of his employment duties. At first he had been taken on as a semi-skilled mechanic, but he was later offered occupation of the employer’s bungalow . .
Cited – Fox v Dalby 1874
A militia sergeant occupied a house built expressly for accommodation of persons looking after the stores and which had been assigned to him by his commanding officer.
Held: The sergeant did not occupy the house as a tenant. Brett J said: . .
Applied – Glasgow Corporation v Johnstone and Others (orse Johnstons) HL 1965
A house lived in by a church officer was occupied for rating purposes by the church’s congregational board which employed him, and so was not liable for full rates. Lord Hodson said: ‘The distinction is usually shortly stated in this way: if the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.264055

Godwin v Rossendale Borough Council: CA 3 May 2002

The appellant was a landlord. His tenant was entitled to housing benefit, which was paid direct to the landlord. The authority decided that the benefit was no longer payable, and sought eventually to recover overpayments from the landlord by making deductions from other amounts due to him for tenants in the same building.
Held: The sums were repayable. The council should have given him notice of the intention to stop the benefit, but that fault was cured by his having a right of appeal later. It would make sense to hear both appeals together.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson, Lord Justice Chadwick and Lord Justice Clarke

Citations:

Times 24-May-2002, Gazette 13-Jun-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 726

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Housing, Benefits, Benefits

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.171263

Regina (Bernard and Another) v Enfield Borough Council: Admn 25 Oct 2002

The claimants were husband and wife. They had six children. The wife was severely disabled and confined to a wheelchair. The defendant Council provided the family with a small house but in breach, as they ultimately accepted, of section 21(1) (a) of the National Assistance Act, failed to provide the family with accommodation suited to her disability. The claimants had had their human rights infringed by the respondents who had failed in their duties to provide assistance and so to respect their rights to private and family life.
Held: The courts must respect the intention of the Act and the seriousness of the infringement. The council had not acted for some 20 months. There is no comparable tort, but awards should neither be low or high in comparison. Awards or maladministration are comparable. andpound;10,000 was appropriate here.

Judges:

Sullivan J

Citations:

Times 08-Nov-2002, Gazette 12-Dec-2002, [2002] EWHC 2282 Admin, [2003] HLR 27, [2003] HRLR 111

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1988, European Convention on Human Rights Art 8, National Assistance Act 1948 21(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Morris v London Borough of Newham Admn 2002
The claimant complained that the defendant authority had failed to provide her and her family with suitable accommodation pursuant to its duty under section 193. Breach of duty was conceded. The relief sought by the claimant included damages for . .

Cited by:

Cited – Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark CA 16-Oct-2003
The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the . .
Cited – Greenfield, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
The appellant had been charged with and disciplined for a prison offence. He was refused legal assistance at his hearing, and it was accepted that the proceedings involved the determination of a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6 of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.178030

Accent Peerless Ltd v Kingsdon and Another: CA 12 Dec 2007

The tenants appealed an order for possession of their assured property. The order had been made on the basis that their behaviour constituted a nuisance under Ground 14. They suffered post traumatic stress disorder, and were acutely sensitive to noise leading to them make many complaints about their neighbours. They said that the court should have taken account of the great decrease in the number of complaints.
Held: The judge had allowed for the abatement and noted that without accepting the medical treatment offered, the defendants remained at risk of further similar behaviour. Similarly the court had properly considered the possibility of suspending the order, and rejected it for the same reasons.

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 1314

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988 7 9(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.262104

Smith (on Behalf of the Gypsy Council) v Buckland: CA 12 Dec 2007

The defendants appealed an order requiring them to leave caravan pitches managed by the council.
Held: The court referred to the absence of procedural safeguards to which, in view of their vulnerable position, gipsies were entitled.

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 1318, [2008] 1 WLR 661

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Caravan Sites Act 1968 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Doherty and others v Birmingham City Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local authority can obtain a summary order for possession against an occupier of a site which it owns and has been used for many years as a gipsy and travellers’ caravan site. His licence to occupy the site has come to . .
Cited – McGlynn v Welwyn Hatfield District Council CA 1-Apr-2009
The appellant was a non-secure tenant of the respondent. It had served a notice to quit and he now appealed against an order for possession on public law grounds.
Held: There had been a delay between the issue of the notice to quit and the . .
Cited – Doran v Liverpool City Council CA 3-Mar-2009
The claimant sought to set aside an order requiring him to give up possession of a caravan pitch held under the 1968 Act.
Held: The decision to serve a notice to quit which was reasonable on the facts known to the local authority at the time . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.262106

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

The applicant had been refused accomodation as homeless after disclosing the ownership of a family home in Uganda. He had lived and worked in the UK for 15 years. The authority did not accept that it had later been repossessed. The council now appealed against a finding to the contrary, saying that, per Osmani, to find accomodation unreasonable, an applicant had first to occupy it and then leave it.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Sedley LJ had said in Osmani that no local authority could contemplate asking this of an applicant. Auld had not accepted the interpretation proposed and his view was to be preferred. An applicant was not to be required to return to unsuitable accomodation and to leave it before being treated as uunintentionally homeless. Nor was the council entitled only to look at the size and structural quality of the available accomonation. Other proper reasons might apply, as they did here.
As to costs the court declined to accept that there should be a general practice of ordering a stay on costs in favour of authorities on such appeals.

Judges:

Toulson, Carnwath LJJ, P

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 1281, [2008] 2 All ER 701, [2007] 2 Lloyds Rep 555, [2008] 1 All ER (Comm) 685, [2008] 1 WLR 2079, [2007] All ER (D) 32, 151 Sol Jo 1597, (2007) 151 SJLB 1597, [2008] BLGR 409, [2008] HLR 26, [2007] NPC 131

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 175(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Begum (Nipa) v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council CA 1-Nov-1999
The fact that the accommodation found to be available to the applicant for housing was in Bangladesh did not make it unavailable in law. The subsections must be read separately. Accommodation could be available to the applicant even though she could . .
Cited – Regina (on the application of) Awua v Brent London Borough Council HL 6-Jul-1995
Tower Hamlets, having determined the applicant to be homeless, in priority need and not intentionally homeless. After she occupied temporary accomodation she was offered an alternative being told it was the council’s policy only to make one such . .
Cited – Osmani v London Borough of Camden CA 16-Dec-2004
Auld LJ set out the test to be applied by an authority when deciding whether the applicant was vulnerable for the purposes of deciding whether to give priority housing assistance. The courts had recognised the difficult, involved nature of the . .
Cited – Regina 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 – Lockley v National Blood Transfusion Service CA 1992
There was an interlocutory dispute over the granting of an extension of time for service of the defence. The legally aided plaintiff challenged the costs orders made by the district registrar and the judge. Each ordered that the costs be the . .
Cited – Sonia Burkett, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham CA 15-Oct-2004
The appellant challenged an order for costs after dismissal of her application for judicial review of the respondent’s planning decision. The claimant had been granted legal aid at about the time of the bringing in of the new legal aid scheme. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Costs

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.261777

Metropolitan Properties Company (FGC) Limited v Lannon: 11 Jul 1968

Tenants of apartments asked the Rent Officer to fix the fair rents. On appeal, the rents were then set at a rate lower even than they had requested. The rents would serve as a guide for other local rents. The landlords now complained that the chairman of the Rent Assessment Committee had been assisting his own father in negotiating a rent for such a local property, and had represented other tenants. They complained of bias.
Held: He should not have sat. It was accepted that he had had no pecuniary interest himself, and had acted scrupulously. It was a question of whether there was any appearance of bias.
Lord Denning MR considered the test for apparent bias, and said: ‘The court looks at the impression which would be given to other people. Even if he was as impartial as could be, nevertheless if right-minded persons would think that, in the circumstances, there was a real likelihood of bias on his part, then he should not sit. And if he does sit, his decision cannot stand.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Danckwerts LJ, Edmund Davies LJ

Citations:

[1968] RVR 490, [1968] EWCA Civ 5, [1968] 3 All ER 304, [1968] 3 WLR 694, (1968) 19 P and CR 856, [1969] 1 QB 577

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Rent Act 1965

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Abdroikof, Regina v Green; Regina v Williamson HL 17-Oct-2007
The House was asked whether a jury in criminal trials containing variously a Crown Prosecution Service solicitor, or a police officer would have the appearance of bias. In Abdroikof, the presence of the police officer on the jury was discovered only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Natural Justice

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.260119

Harouki v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: CA 17 Oct 2007

The applicant sought housing as a homeles person. Her present accommodation for herself, her husband and five children was so overcrowded that continued occupation was a criminal offence. She appealed a finding that it was reasonable to continue living there notwithstanding the continuing commission of the offence.
Held: The appeal failed. The statutory guidance correctly expressed the law, and however surprising it might be, the ‘guidance explicitly contemplates that statutory overcrowding may not by itself be sufficient to determine reasonableness. ‘ The officer had been free to take account of the borough’s overall overcrowding, and had not acted illegally or irrationally.

Judges:

Ward LJ, Thomas LJ, Richards LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 1000

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 235

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Westminster City Council, ex parte Ali 1983
McCullough J considered whether it was reasonable to expect the applicant to continue to live in overcrowded accomodation: ‘That anyone should regard as reasonable that a family of that size should live in one room 10 ft x 12 ft in size, or . .
Cited – Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua HL 6-Jul-1995
The term ‘Accommodation’ in the Act was to be read to include short term lettings, and was not to be restricted to secure accommodation, and the loss of such accommodation can be counted as intentional homelessness. If a person who had been provided . .
Cited – Elrify v City of Westminster Council CA 23-Mar-2007
The court considered what was to happen when a person in overcrowded accommodation sought rehousing: ‘Part 10 of the 1985 Act concerns overcrowding. Its pivotal provision is section 327 which provides that, subject to some exceptions, the occupier . .
Cited – Regina v London Borough of Camden ex parte Jibril Admn 21-Jan-1997
The court considered what background could be allowed for when, in a homelessness application, the applicant said that it would be unreasonable to expect him to continue to occupy his present dwelling.
Held: ‘in judging what is suitable, the . .
Cited – Griffin, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Southwark Admn 29-Oct-2004
The applicant had sought emergency housing with her husband, but refused accomodation on a particuar estate for her safety. She had then been evicted form the temporary housing supplied on the application. After a series of temporary arrangements . .
Cited – Griffin v Westminster City Council CA 28-Jan-2004
The claimant sought emergency rehousing saying that he was a vulnerable person within section 189. The court at first instance had overturned the rejection of his claim by the authority.
Held: The test set out in the statute was to be followed . .
Cited – Begum (Nipa) v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council CA 1-Nov-1999
The fact that the accommodation found to be available to the applicant for housing was in Bangladesh did not make it unavailable in law. The subsections must be read separately. Accommodation could be available to the applicant even though she could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.259901

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

The court considered the duties of a local authority to provide housing where a a court made a shared residence order.
Held: The making of an order for shared residence between a mother and father living apart was not itself determinative to give the father a right to be rehoused through the need to care for the child. However, once a court had decided in contested proceedings that residence should be shared, the housing authority could not deny that the children might reasonably be expected to reside with the father for the purposes of the 1996 Act.

Judges:

Moses LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 970, Times 19-Nov-2007, [2008] 1 WLR 1289

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 189(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond Upon Thames HL 4-Feb-2009
The father had been awarded shared residence for three children. He asked the local authority to provide appropriate housing.
Held: The authority’s appeal succeeded.
‘When any family court decides with whom the children of separated . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Children

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.259765

Tsao v Pempengco: CA 20 Sep 2007

Treatment of VAT under Nectar customer loyalty programme.
The landlord sought permission to appeal against an order finding the tenant in substantial arrears, but awarding similar substantial sums to the tenant for the landlord’s failure to repair.

Judges:

Auld LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 938

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Rent Act 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.259672

Bernard, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Enfield: Admn 25 Oct 2002

The claimants were husband and wife. They had six children. The wife was severely disabled and confined to a wheelchair. In breach of their duty under section 21(1)(a) of the 1948 Act, the respondent council failed for some 20 months to provide the family with accommodation suited to her disability. The consequences were appalling. The wife was doubly incontinent and, because there was no wheelchair access to the lavatory, was forced to defecate and urinate on the living-room floor. And she was unable to play any part in looking after her six children.
Held: The respondent’s failure was a clear breach of the claimant’s article 8 rights and not at all finely balanced. The court awarded andpound;10,000 damages.

Judges:

Sullivan J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 2282 (Admin), [2003] HRLR 111, [2003] LGR 423

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998 8, National Assistance Act 1948 21(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 6-Jul-2011
The claimant, a former prima ballerina, had suffered injury as she grew old. She came to suffer a condition requiring her to urinate at several points during each night. The respondent had been providing a carer to stay with her each night to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Damages, Housing

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258663

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Hockley and Another: CA 24 Jun 2019

Interpretation of Regulation B13 of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 introduced into social sector housing a cap on housing benefit in cases of deemed under occupancy. It did so by applying what has been described as the size or bedroom criteria.

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 1080

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Benefits

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.638829

Osei v London Borough of Southwark: CA 25 Jul 2007

Judges:

Clarke MR, Arden LJ, Hooper LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 787

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 191

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Thurrock Borough Council ex parte Williams QBD 1981
The burden when determining intentional homelessness is upon the local authority to be satisfied that the applicant became homeless intentionally before it can reach a conclusion that he was so homeless; if its inquiries lead to doubt or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258476

Andrews and Another v Cunningham: CA 23 Jul 2007

The elderly appellant claimed a non-shorthold assured tenancy. He had moved in in 1999, but had been given a rent book which described the tenancy as an assured tenancy. The now deceased landlord had himself occupied another flat in the building.
Held: Whilst the landlord occupied the house, the tenancy could only be a common law tenancy subject to one month’s notice. The rentbook describing the tenancy as an assured tenancy did not prevent it also being an assured shorthold tenancy. The tenancy had become an assured shorthold tenancy on conversion, and the tenant’s appeal failed.

Judges:

Waller LJ, Wilson LJ, Lawrence Collins LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 762

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Mannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance HL 21-May-1997
Minor Irregularity in Break Notice Not Fatal
Leases contained clauses allowing the tenant to break the lease by serving not less than six months notice to expire on the third anniversary of the commencement date of the term of the lease. The tenant gave notice to determine the leases on 12th . .
Cited – McDonald and Another v Fernandez and Another CA 19-Jul-2003
The landlord served a notice to terminate a shorthold tenancy saying that he required possession on a certain day. The tenancy had been a periodic tenancy, and the date was not the last day of a period of the tenancy.
Held: The Act was . .
Cited – Speedwell Estates Limited and Covent Garden Group Limited v Jane Rush Dalziel and others CA 31-Jul-2001
Tenants sought to purchase the freehold reversion of their properties under leasehold enfranchisement. The landlord objected that the forms were incomplete and invalid. The tenants accepted that there were defects, but asserted that these were not . .
Cited – Burman v Mount Cook Land Ltd CA 20-Nov-2001
The tenant occupied a flat under a long lease at a low rent. She was entitled to acquire the freehold on payment of a premium and after following the procedure under the Act. The landlord served a purported counter notice which did not state in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258297

Abdi, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Lambeth: Admn 26 Jun 2007

The claimant had had her application for housing as a homeless person rejected by the council, and now said that it was unfair that the same officer had also rejected her subsequent application for temporary housing pending her appeal.
Held: The Act intended the nomination of officers to make such decisions, and imposed specific rules where a review of a rejection was required. There was no requirement that a different officer should consider the applications by this claimant, and a fair-minded and informed observer would not see any real possibility of bias.

Judges:

Hickinbottom J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1565 (Admin), Times 11-Jul-2007

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 184

Housing

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.254343

Islington London Borough Council v Honeygan-Green (Honeygan): QBD 25 May 2007

The court considered whether the determination of a secure tenancy by the granting of a possession order, brings to an end an existing application which has established the right to buy at a particular time and at a particular price, or whether such an application is capable of being revived once the tenancy itself has been revived.
Held: Once the possession order had been granted, the tenant became a tolerated trespassser. Once she repaid the arrears, she became a secure tenant again, but she would then have to make a fresh application to purchase a long lease.

Judges:

Nelson J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1270 (QB), Times 28-Jun-2007, [2007] 4 All ER 818

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 122

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington CA 22-Apr-2008
The claimant was a council tenant with the right to buy her property. A possession order was made, but then discharged.
Held: On the revival of the tenancy her right to buy and discount was also revived, and there was no need to serve a fresh . .
Cited – Knowsley Housing Trust v White; Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington; Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association HL 10-Dec-2008
The House considered situations where a secure or assured tenancy had been made subject to a suspended possession order and where despite the tenant failing to comply with the conditions, he had been allowed to continue in occupation.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.253273

Polar Park Enterprises v Allason: ChD 18 Apr 2007

The defendant occupied property belonging to the claimant. An order for immediate possession had been granted in January. The defendant now said that part of the order was been made without jurisdiction.
Held: Though he occupied the property as a licensee only of the claimant, that licence had been granted against the promise of the defendant to repair and insure the property. It had been granted for ‘money or money’s worth’. That made the defendant and his family lawful occupiers of the property even after the licence was terminated, and that he had the protection of the 1977 Act, and that he could only be evicted by means of a court order. The order made in January had been to that extent made without jurisdiction, and the writ for possession was revoked.

Judges:

Briggs J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1088 (Ch), Times 26-Jun-2007

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 3.1(7), Protection from Eviction Act 1977 3A(7)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Polarpark Enterprises Inc v Allason ChD 22-Jan-2007
The defendant occupied the claimant’s property as a residence under a license. The claimant had sought immediate possession. The defendant claimed that he either owned it, had a claim in adverse possession, or a license and the right to protection . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.252308

White v Knowsley Housing Trust and Another: CA 2 May 2007

The tenant was an assured tenant. She fell into arrears of rent and a possession order was made, but suspended on terms. The court considered whether she continued to be an assured tenant, and could assert a right to buy the property as an assured tenant of a social landlord.
Held: The tenant’s appeal was dismissed. The secure tenancy was determined at the time set by the court order made, and not only when possession was taken. In this case the secure tenancy expired on the last day fixed by the order for the tenant to give possession. She had no right to buy the property. After the last date stated for possession, the tenant was only a tolerated trespasser.

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 404, Times 15-May-2007

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Burrows v Brent London Borough Council HL 31-Oct-1996
The authority had obtained a possession order from its secure tenant but then agreed to accept payments toward the arrears. The tenant applied for and was granted a declaration that she had on that agreement acquired a new tenancy. The authority . .
Cited – Harlow District Council v Hall CA 28-Feb-2006
The defendant had been subject to a possession order in respect of his secure tenancy. He was later adjudged bankrupt. He asserted that the bankruptcy specifically prevented other action to enforce the debt, and the suspended possession order was . .
Cited – Bristol City Council v Hassan and Glastonbury CA 23-May-2006
The council had obtained possession orders for two properties from secure tenants, but the orders were suspended for so long as rent arrears were being discharged. The judges had understood that a date must appear on the possession order.
Cited – Brent London Borough Council v Knightley and Another CA 26-Feb-1997
The daughter of a deceased tenant claimed succession to her mother’s interest in a tenancy which was subject to a possession order.
Held: There can be no succession to a tolerated trespasser under a former secure tenancy. . .
Cited – Keeves v Dunn CA 1924
The court considred the meaing of the term ‘statutory tenancy’: ‘I think that it is a pity that that expression [‘statutory tenant’] was ever introduced. It is really a misnomer, for he is not a tenant at all; although he cannot be turned out of . .
Cited – Sherrin v Brand CA 1956
The landlord had obtained a possession order against his secure tenant. The order was suspended, but the landlord then failed to enforce the order after the date and when the tenant had failed to comply with the terms of the suspension. The tenant . .
Cited – Thompson v Elmbridge Borough Council CA 1987
The wife was the secure tenant of the premises, against whom the local authority landlord obtained a possession order on grounds of arrears of rent, not to be enforced on payment of a weekly sum off the arrears in addition to what the order . .
Cited – Clarke v Grant CA 1950
Lord Goddard CJ said: ‘if a notice to quit has been given in respect of a periodic tenancy such as a yearly tenancy, the result is to bring the tenancy to an end just as effectually as if there had been a term which had expired.’ . .
Cited – Street v Mountford HL 6-Mar-1985
When a licence is really a tenancy
The document signed by the occupier stated that she understood that she had been given a licence, and that she understood that she had not been granted a tenancy protected under the Rent Acts. Exclusive occupation was in fact granted.
Held: . .
Cited – Artesian Residential Investments Limited v Beck CA 19-Mar-1999
The tenant sought relief from forfeiture under section 138 against a landlord seeking possession of his assured tenancy. There were arrears of rent which he believed he could pay.
Held: The grounds for possession were statutory, and had been . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Knowsley Housing Trust v White; Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington; Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association HL 10-Dec-2008
The House considered situations where a secure or assured tenancy had been made subject to a suspended possession order and where despite the tenant failing to comply with the conditions, he had been allowed to continue in occupation.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251617

Vesely v Levy and others: CA 27 Apr 2007

The tenant appealed against a finding that her tenancy was a statutory shorthold tenancy following termination of an assured shorthold tenancy, or an assured tenancy. She moved in as a carer for the tenant of the trustee defendants. That arrangement developed. The trustees said that she was not then treated as a tenant. The tenant said she became their tenant. An adjoining flat was bought, and a formal tenancy of both ran from August 2001 after the beneficiary and first tenant ceased to occupy the flat.
Held: The judge had found as a fact that the sums paid were for expenses and not by way of rent, and ‘a rent-free arrangement for the exclusive use and occupation of premises would not create a tenancy, if the correct inference from the purpose of the arrangement and the surrounding circumstances was that there was no intention to create the landlord and tenant relationship between the parties. The judge’s finding that the arrangement was for the continued sharing of the expenses of a joint household by two friends makes it very difficult, applying an objective test, to infer that there was an intention to grant a tenancy to one of them.’ Any tenancy arose only later at which time it was a shorthold tenancy.

Judges:

Mummery LJ, Arden LJ, Jacob LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 367

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 96

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold (2) CA 25-Feb-1988
Various leases of properties had been granted. Legal and General occupied the property under an arrangement under which they paid no rent. The landlord sought possession, saying that the agreements were licences not tenancies because of the absence . .
Cited – Bostock v Bryant 1990
When considering whether a payment has been paid by way of rent, the court looks to the explanation or reason for the payment, asking whether the payment is for exclusive use and occupation of the premises. In this case a payment by occupiers in . .
Cited – Street v Mountford HL 6-Mar-1985
When a licence is really a tenancy
The document signed by the occupier stated that she understood that she had been given a licence, and that she understood that she had not been granted a tenancy protected under the Rent Acts. Exclusive occupation was in fact granted.
Held: . .
Cited – Montague v Browning CA 1954
Landlords had let the property to their caretaker of the whole premises. andpound;40 was to be deducted from the agreed rental value of the house (andpound;66), and he was to pay andpound;26pa in rent. The parties agreed that the letting was . .
Cited – Moss v Brown CA 1946
The parties to the disputed arrangements were friends at the time when the letting arrangement was entered into. The putative landlord said there was no intention by the parties to create the relationship of landlord and tenant, the issue being . .
Cited – Moses Toms v Luckett 1847
A lodger may in fact have exclusive possession of his room or rooms in a house, but that does not necessarily turn him into a tenant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251529

Riverside Housing Association Ltd v White and Another: HL 25 Apr 2007

The claimant housing association had raised its rents. The tenants objected that they were unlawful not having complied with the tenancy agreements. They said the clause allowed only one increase in each June of a year, and then only if 28 days notice had been given before the first Monday of June.
Held: The landlord’s appeal succeeded. The review clause was of a type not previously condidered by the courts, and against a non-commercial background. ‘Riverside is entitled to increase the rent once a year on 28 days notice, which notice can take effect any time on or after the first Monday in June.
It is true that the words ‘with effect from’ could be taken as meaning ‘with immediate effect from’ but they can mean ‘on or at any time after.’

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, Lord Mance, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury

Citations:

Times 07-May-2007, [2007] UKHL 20, [2007] 18 EG 152, [2007] 29 EG 144, [2007] L and TR 22, [2007] NPC 46, [2007] HLR 31, [2007] 2 EGLR 69, [2008] 1 P and CR 13, [2007] 4 All ER 97

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Gary White, Ellen White v Riverside Housing Association Ltd CA 6-Dec-2005
The Association’s tenants said that a clause in their tenancy agreement would allow for an increase in the rent only once a year, and then only in June and if 28 days notice was given before the first Monday in June.
Held: The notices were . .
Cited – United Scientific Holdings v Burnley Borough Council HL 1978
The House was asked whether a failure by a lessor to keep strictly to the timetable laid down in a rent review clause in a lease necessarily deprived the lessor of the benefit of the rent review.
Held: A stipulation as to time in an option . .
Cited – Raineri v Miles HL 1980
Damages may be awarded for a delay in completion under an open contract even though time was not of the essence. The failure to complete on the day fixed was a breach. Lord Edmund-Davies said: ‘The fact that time had not been declared to be of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251485

Hinds, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Islington: Admn 15 Jul 1994

Application for judicial review, challenging a decision of the local authority which found the applicant to be intentionally homeless, and raising in an acute from the sufficiency of the reasons for that decision within section 64(4) of the Housing Act 1985.

Citations:

[1994] EWHC 8 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.381683

Lambeth London Borough Council v Ireneschild: CA 16 Mar 2007

The tenant held a secure tenancy of a first floor flat of the Council. She was severely disabled and argued that the danger of injury meant that she should be allowed to occupy the empty ground floor flat. She complained at the way the authority had relied on reports she had not seen. The authority appealed against a finding that the procedure was unfair.
Held: Though the authority had failed to give the applicant a full opportunity to comment on the reports on which it had acted, the appeal was allowed.
Hallett LJ said that the fact that the material in the assessment was essentially derived from the respondent herself was one of the factors in deciding that there had been no unfairness.

Judges:

Dyson LJ, Hallett LJ, Sir Peter Gibson

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 234

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

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

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Wahid v London Borough of Tower Hamlets CA 7-Mar-2002
Gilliatt The appellant suffered from schizophrenia. He was refused permission to apply for judicial review and for orders requiring the local authority not just to provide suitable accommodation but better . .
Cited – CREEDNZ Inc v The Governor General 1981
(New Zealand) The court looked at those considerations which a decision maker can choose for himself whether or not to take them into account. Cooke J said: ‘what has to be emphasised is that it is only when the statute expressly or impliedly . .
Cited – In Re Findlay, in re Hogben HL 1985
A public authority, and the Prison Service in particular, is free, within the limits of rationality, to decide on any policy as to how to exercise its discretions; it is entitled to change its policy from time to time for the future, and a person . .
Cited – Regina 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 – London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Runa Begum CA 6-Mar-2002
The applicant had applied for rehousing as a homeless person. She was offered interim accommodation but refused it. Her case was reviewed, and her reasons rejected. She claimed the procedure was unfair, in that the authority was looking at decisions . .
Cited – Regina v Islington Borough Council Ex Parte Rixon QBD 17-Apr-1996
The local authority regarded lack of resources or facilities as an insuperable obstacle to any further attempt to make provision under the 1970 Act.
Held: A Local Authority should allow for non-statutory guidance in assessing a disabled . .
Appeal from – Ireneschild, Regina (on the Application Of) v London Borough of Lambeth Admn 8-Sep-2006
The claimant sought judicial review of the authority’s decision as to her housing requirements saying that the consultation had been inadequate.
Held: Judicial review was granted. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Save Our Surgery Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Joint Committee of Primary Care Trusts Admn 7-Mar-2013
The claimants sought judicial review of the report prepared by the defendants under which departments providing childrens’ heart surgery at their regional hospital would close. They complained that the consultation had been inadequate and flawed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.250041