The claimant challenged the authority’s housing policy which sought to implement national guidelines awarding points to housing applicants and allocating housing accordingly. He said it did not give adequate protection to the homeless.
Held: The scheme did give some preference to homeless people, and the form of implementation of the national policy was within a range of discretion for the authority. Though the scheme appeared in most respects to comply, a figure of 300 points was available for award but this was not properly explained as part of the policy. This was potentially such a significant element that the absence of an explanation undermined the validity of the scheme. The applicant’s appeal was allowed.
Judges:
Dyson LJ, Hallett LJ, Sir Peter Gibson
Citations:
[2007] EWCA Civ 132
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Lin, Hassan v Barnet London Borough Council Admn 11-May-2006
The Authority had established a scheme under section 167 for the allocation of its housing accomodation. . .
Cited – London Borough of Lambeth v A CA 23-Jul-2002
The court considered the lawfulness of the defendant authority’s housing policy. Collins J said: ‘Unless it is clear that no applicants who are not entitled to preference are able to compete on equal terms with those who are, the scheme cannot . .
Cited by:
Cited – Alam v London Borough of Tower Hamlets Admn 23-Jan-2009
The claimant sought to challenge the defendant’s housing allocation policy. He said that as a homeless person he should have been given a reasonable preference for housing. The authority said he was not in priority need, and that the temporary . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Housing
Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.248991