The applicant applied for housing being a homeless single mother. The council found that she was intentionally homeless, and was required to leave the temporary accomodation provided. The judge considered that the phrase ‘reasonable opportunity of securing accommodation’ involved consideration by the local authority both of the applicant’s individual situation and that of the authority itself. It was argued that this interpretation would result in there being little effective difference between treatment of intentionally and unintentionally homeless applicants.
Held: the tenant’s appeal was allowed. The duty with respect to accommodation is that it be made available for such period as the authority consider will give the applicant a ‘reasonable opportunity of securing accommodation for his occupation’. That is something conferred on the applicant; a right he acquires coterminous with the extent of the duty. While the authority can decide, subject to the supervision of the court under ordinary principles, what amounts to a reasonable opportunity, the expression does not permit them, in doing so, to have regard to considerations peculiar to them, such as the extent of their resources and other demands upon them. It is what is reasonable from the applicant’s standpoint, having regard to his circumstances and in the context of the accommodation potentially available. ‘ What amounts to a reasonable opportunity will depend on the particular circumstances but it is an assessment the authority are capable of making without converting it into a duty to meet the appellant’s needs. In this statutory context, a distinction is maintainable between giving a reasonable opportunity and giving such opportunity as will succeed in obtaining accommodation. The duty to provide a reasonable opportunity falls short of a duty to provide long term accommodation. ‘
[2006] EWCA Civ 718, Times 30-Jun-2006
Bailii, Gazette
Housing Act 1996 190(2)(a), Homelessness Act 2002
England and Wales
Citing:
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Housing
Leading Case
Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.242519
