The applicant was an epileptic who required careful medical supervision, but the local authority did not regard her as vulnerable for housing purposes.
Held: Review was declined. The matter was one for the authority exercising its discretion. The applicant’s ability to find accomodation on her own was decisive: ‘Vulnerable in my judgment means vulnerable in the housing market. There is no indication here of difficulty in finding accommodation or of maintaining the need for special accommodation. There is not one word of evidence upon those matters.’
Judges:
Mann J
Citations:
[1989] 20 HLR 153
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 by:
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 – Ortiz v City of Westminster CA 1994
The applicant was a twenty four year old woman with a history of drug addiction and alcoholism. There was in fact suitable hostel accommodation available which had been offered to the applicant at the relevant time and it was hard to see why she . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Housing
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.200292
