Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Housing - From: 1995 To: 1995

This page lists 40 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.


 
 Regina v London Borough of Islington, ex parte Hinds; QBD 1995 - (1995) 27 HLR 65
 
Brent London Borough Council v Carmel Murphy [1995] 28 HLR 203
1995
CA
Roch LJ
Housing
The defendant was a secure tenant. When she was sued for arrears of rent, she counterclaimed for damages for breach of the landlord’s obligation to repair for over seven years. The judge awarded her general damages for diminution of the value of the tenancy calculated by reference to a reduction in the rent payable and general damages by reference to an annual sum. The award totalled £50,000. Held: Leave to appeal was refused. One ground of appeal was that the awards of damages were excessive. Roch LJ said that there was no indication that the awards were wrong in principle or excessive in amount. Damages may be awarded on both bases.

 
Habinteg Housing Association v Jones [1995] 27 HLR 299
1995
CA
Staughton LJ
Housing
A female tenant endured six years of misery caused by cockroaches, described as a quite appalling infestation for which she was in no way responsible. Held: The court was not satisfied that the dismissal of the tenant's claim was the right result which the law ought to reach and that the tenant ought to have some compensation for the misery she had suffered because of the cockroaches. Nevertheless neither the tenant nor her family had any civil remedy for the injuries to their health or to their property which they have had to endure through living in unfit conditions: "It may be that the Public Health Act, or its successor, provides some means for securing that these matters are put right promptly, but it does not seem to have worked in this case. We are told that the Law Commission has been considering such a problem. It is to be hoped that they will recommend a solution. What is more, it is to be hoped that if they do, Parliament will carry it out. Judges and lawyers are sometimes reproached when the law does not produce the right result. There are occasions when the reproach should be directed elsewhere."
Public Health Act 1936
1 Citers


 
Regina v Islington London Borough Council ex parte Hinds [1995] 28 HLR 302
1995


Housing

1 Citers



 
 Barnes v Sheffield City Council; CA 1995 - (1995) 27 HLR 719
 
Regina v Slough Borough Council Ex Parte Khan and Another Times, 30 January 1995; (1995) 27 HLR 492
30 Jan 1995
QBD

Housing
A Local Authority had to consider all possible local connections before passing an applicant for housing under the Act to another other Local Authority for assistance.
Housing Act 1985 61
1 Citers


 
Regina v Newham London Borough Council Ex Parte Dada Times, 03 February 1995
3 Feb 1995
CA

Housing
A child, en ventre sa mere, is not a sufficiently separate person to be someone to whom consideration could given for its own housing needs.
Housing Act 1985 75

 
Regina v Bristol City Council Ex Parte Bradie Times, 06 February 1995
6 Feb 1995
QBD

Housing
Unlawful eviction can be 'other disaster' giving priority need for housing.
Housing Act 1985 59

 
Regina v Islington London Borough Council ex Parte Hassan Times, 16 February 1995
16 Feb 1995
QBD

Housing
Once an applicant is deemed homeless by section 58, no later act can cause homelessness.
Housing Act 1985 58

 
Regina v Barking and Dagenham Bd Ex Parte Okuneye Times, 17 February 1995
17 Feb 1995
QBD

Housing
It was intentional homelessness when a fiancée had not set up a house here before leaving a settled left home abroad to come here.
Housing Act 1985 60-1, 75


 
 Regina v Westminster City Council, ex Parte Mulonso; CA 13-Mar-1995 - Ind Summary, 13 March 1995
 
Regina v Wandsworth Borough Council Ex Parte Crooks (And Six Other Applications) Independent, 30 March 1995; Times, 12 April 1995
30 Mar 1995
QBD

Housing, Local Government
Local Authority may re-house in private sector on an assured shorthold tenancy which was expected to be renewed under normal circumstances.
Housing Act 1985 65(2)

 
Harrow London Borough Council v Johnstone Times, 31 March 1995
31 Mar 1995
CA

Contempt of Court, Housing
A local authority was denied a possession order against a Husband when the Wife who had been excluded from the property by a court order surrendered the tenancy.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council v Paice Ind Summary, 15 May 1995; Times, 03 April 1995; (1995) 27 HLR 433; [1995] 2 EGLR 9; [1995] 44 EG 139; (1995) LG Rev 909; [1995] EG 54 (CS); [1995] NPC 46
3 Apr 1995
CA
Waite LJ
Landlord and Tenant, Housing
A dwelling subtenant of part of premises comprised in a business lease became a secure tenant on the surrender of the mesne tenancy. Section 79 of the 1985 Act had ambulatory effect.
Waite LJ said: "The use of the term "at any time" in section 79(1) shows that the section is to have ambulatory effect. Occupiers, that is to say, may be liable to pass in and out of secure tenant status - depending upon whether their landlord for the time being is or is not a local authority; or upon changes in the tenant's own circumstances taking him in and out of the tenant condition."
Housing Act 1985 79(1)
1 Citers


 
Bauer v Commission C-299/93; [1995] EUECJ C-299/93
6 Apr 1995
ECJ

Housing
ECJ Arbitration clause - Residential tenancy agreement - Determination of the rent - Termination - Restitution of damage.
[ Bailii ]

 
 Mohamed v Manek and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; CA 28-Apr-1995 - Times, 28 April 1995; [1995] 27 HLR 439; (1995) 30 HLR 481
 
Regina v Lambeth London Borough Council Ex Parte Pattinson Times, 28 April 1995
28 Apr 1995
QBD

Housing
Aa npplication for housing by a Local Authority's own tenant was treated as an application for a transfer.
Housing Act 1985 Part II

 
Regina v Hertsmere Borough Council Ex Parte Woolgar Times, 10 May 1995; Independent, 10 May 1995
10 May 1995
QBD

Housing
A Local Authority's duty to provide housing for homeless was satisfied by a housing association investigation, provided the decision was made by the authority.
Housing Act 1985 65

 
Wandsworth London Borough Council v Atwell Ind Summary, 22 May 1995; (1995) 27 HLR 536
22 May 1995
CA
Glidewell LJ, Waite LJ
Landlord and Tenant, Housing
The tenant took on a weekly tenancy in 1975 of Wandsworth under an "Acceptance of Offer of Accomodation". The document made no provision for service. The tenant left for America leaving A as a caretaker. Wandsworth ended the tenancy serving a notice under the 1997 Act py post both at the property and at his address in the US. The tenant denied receiving either. The landlord claimed that service was deemed by section 196(2) of the 1925 Act. The tenant now appealed against the order for possession. Held. The appeal succeeded. Section 196 only applied to a provision in an instrument and did not affect a mode of service specified in an Act. There could be no deemed service of a notice to quit under the 1977 Act.
Law of Property Act 1925 1963-3 - Protection from Eviction Act 1977

 
Regina v Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council Ex Parte Grillo Independent, 13 June 1995; (1995) 28 HLR 94
13 Jun 1995
CA

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


 
Regina v Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council Ex Parte Ben-El-Mabrouk Times, 22 June 1995
22 Jun 1995
CA

Housing
An inadequate fire escape in a house was not sufficient cause to make it so unfit for habitation that an occupier could be considered homeless.

 
Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua Times, 07 July 1995; Independent, 25 July 1995; Gazette, 15 September 1995; [1996] 1 AC 55; (1995) 27 HLR 453; [1995] 3 All ER 493; [1995] 3 WLR 215; [1995] UKHL 23; 93 LGR 581
6 Jul 1995
HL
Lord Hoffmann
Housing
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 with accommodation in accordance with section 65(2) of the 1985 Act was once again made homeless or threatened with homelessness (for example, because the Council or other landlord had terminated his right of occupation), he might apply again, and the Council would be required once again to make enquiries under section 62(1). Suitability is primarily a matter of space and arrangement though no doubt other matters may also be material. It is important when considering an authority’s duty under the two parts of the Act not to confuse them.
Lord Hoffmann reviewed the case law: "The consequence of the decision in Ex parte Puhlhofer was that a person accommodated in conditions so intolerable that it would not be reasonable for him to continue to occupy that accommodation was not homeless although, if he actually left, he would not thereby become intentionally homeless. This produced the inconvenient result that persons living in such conditions had to put themselves on the street before they could activate the local authority's duty to provide them with accommodation. To remedy this difficulty, the 1986 amendments (by sections 14(1) and (2)) again introduced a definition of "accommodation" in section 58(2A) of the Act of 1985: 'A person shall not be treated as having accommodation unless it is accommodation which it would be reasonable for him to continue to occupy.' Guidance on the quality of accommodation which a local housing authority is entitled to treat as reasonable for a person to continue to occupy is provided by section 58(2B) (as added by the Act of 1986):
'Regard may be had, in determining whether it would be reasonable for a person to continue to occupy accommodation, to the general circumstances prevailing in relation to housing in the district of the local housing authority to whom he has applied for accommodation or for assistance in obtaining accommodation.'
It follows that a local authority is entitled to regard a person as having accommodation (and therefore as not being homeless) if he has accommodation which, having regard to the matters mentioned in subsection (2B), it can reasonably consider that it would be reasonable for him to continue to occupy."
Lord Hoffmann also said: "there is nothing in the Act to say that a local authority cannot take the view that a person can reasonably be expected to continue to occupy accommodation which is temporary. . the extent to which the accommodation is physically suitable, so that it would be reasonable for a person to continue to occupy it, must be related to the time for which he has been there and is expected to stay. A local housing authority could take the view that a family like the Puhlhofers, put into a single cramped and squalid bedroom, can be expected to make do for a temporary period. On the other hand, there will come a time at which it is no longer reasonable to expect them to continue to occupy such accommodation. At this point they come back within the definition of homeless in section 58(1)."
Housing Act 1985 58(1) 60(1) 65(2) 85(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (on the application of) Awua v Brent London Borough Council [1995] UKHL 23; [1995] 3 All ER 493; [1996] 1 AC 55; [1995] 3 WLR 215; 93 LGR 581
6 Jul 1995
HL
Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Taylor of Gosforth, Lord Hoffmann
Housing
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 offer. Having rejected it as unsuitable, she was given notice to quit the temporary accomodation. She then applied to Brent, but they decided that she was now intentionally homeless. Held: Lord Goff said: ""accommodation" in section 58(1) and section 60(1) means a place which can fairly be described as accommodation (Puhlhofer) and which it would be reasonable, having regard to the general housing conditions in the local housing authority's district, for the person in question to continue to occupy (section 58(2A) and (2B)). There is no additional requirement that it should be settled or permanent.
Housing Act 1985 62(1) 65(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Keepers and Governors of the Free Grammar School of John Lyon v James and Others Times, 07 July 1995
7 Jul 1995
CA

Landlord and Tenant, Housing
A protected subtenant becomes a protected tenant on the forfeiture of an intermediate lease.

 
Burrows v Brent London Borough Council Independent, 22 August 1995; Times, 21 July 1995; [1996] 1 EGLR 32; [1996] 1 WLR 1448; (1995) 27 HLR 748
21 Jul 1995
CA
Auld LJ
Housing

1 Citers



 
 Regina v Northavon District Council Ex Parte Palmer; CA 1-Aug-1995 - Times, 01 August 1995; Independent, 09 August 1995
 
Kelsey Housing Association Ltd v King and Another Times, 08 August 1995; Ind Summary, 28 August 1995; (1995) 28 HLR 270
8 Aug 1995
CA
Aldous LJ, Butler-Sloss LJ
Litigation Practice, Housing
The Court dismissed an appeal from a decision to dispense with notice under the section. A notice to quit had been served and a summons for possession issued with an appendix containing details of the allegations of breach of the tenancy agreement and nuisance.Only much later was an application was made to dismiss the proceedings on the grounds that the notice did not comply with section 8. The judge ruled that the particulars in the notice were inadequate but dispensed with the need for a notice under section 8(1)(b). In considering the words "just and equitable" the court referred to judgments considering those same words in the context of the Rent Act 1977, which emphasised the necessity to "consider all the circumstances". Every case will depend upon its own facts and the pleaded ground or grounds relied on in the notice. The court must take all the circumstances into account, both from the view of the landlord and the tenant, and decide whether it is just and equitable to dispense with the required particulars.
Housing Act 1986 8(1)(b)
1 Citers



 
 Spath Holme Ltd v Greater Manchester and Lancashire Rent Assessment Committee; CA 9-Aug-1995 - Ind Summary, 28 August 1995; Times, 09 August 1995; (1995) 28 HLR 107; [1995] 2 EGLR 80
 
Regina v Bristol County Court Ex Parte Bradic Gazette, 15 September 1995; Independent, 01 September 1995; (1995) HLR 584
1 Sep 1995
CA
Roch LJ
Housing
An unlawful eviction did not of itself constitute an emergency giving the applicant 'priority need' for housing. The event that results in the homelessness of the person claiming a priority need must have the characteristics of being "an emergency" and "a disaster". The omission of the word "any" before the words "other disaster" in the 1985 Act reinforces this reading of the subsection. The court interpreted the words of the subsection to mean an emergency such as flood, fire or other disaster of a similar nature. The line is not to be drawn as narrowly as to confine the emergencies which can give rise to a priority need to those amounting to "force majeure". Parliament must have had in mind emergencies caused by fires deliberately or accidentally caused by human beings. The line is to be drawn so as to embrace all emergencies which consist of physical damage to the accommodation of the applicant which have made the accommodation uninhabitable.
Housing Act 1985 59(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Wealden District Council Ex Parte Wales; Regina v Same Ex Parte Stratford Etc Times, 22 September 1995
22 Sep 1995
QBD

Housing
Before removing travellers from land, the Local Authority must make proper enquiries on the relevant statutory matters.
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 77

 
Regina v Lincolnshire County Council Ex Parte Atkinson; Regina v Wealden District Council Ex Parte Wales and Others Independent, 03 October 1995; (1995) 8 Admin LR 529; [1997] JPL 65
3 Oct 1995
QBD
Sedley J
Housing, Local Government, Planning
A local Authority must make proper welfare enquiries before seeking to remove unlawful campers. The new draconic legislation must be seen in its context. The commons of England provided lawful stopping places for people whose way of life was or had become nomadic. Enough common land survived enclosure to make this way of life still sustainable, but by the 1960 Act, local authorities were given power to close the commons to travellers. This they did with great energy, but made no use of the concomitant power given to them by s24 to open caravan sites to compensate for the closure of the commons. By the 1968 Act, Parliament legislated to make the s24 power a duty, resting in rural areas upon county councils rather than district councils (although the latter continued to possess the power to open sites). For the next quarter of a century there followed a history of non-compliance with the duties imposed by the Act of 1968, marked by a series of decisions of this court holding local authorities to be in breach of their statutory duty, to apparently little practical effect. The default powers vested in central government, to which the court was required to defer, were rarely if ever used. Sedley J: "Those considerations in the material paragraphs (of the Circular [on Gypsy Site Policy]) which are not statutory are considerations of common humanity, none of which can be properly ignored when dealing with one of the most fundamental human needs, the need for shelter with at least a modicum of security."
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 77 78 79 - Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 23 - Caravan Sites Act 1968
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Castelli; Regina v Same Ex Parte Tristan-Garcia; QBD 11-Oct-1995 - Gazette, 01 November 1995; Times, 20 October 1995; Independent, 11 October 1995
 
Re Islington London Borough Council Ex Parte Hind Ind Summary, 23 October 1995
23 Oct 1995
CA

Housing
No specific form required for Local Authority reasons for finding intentional homelessness.
Housing Act 1985 64-4

 
Southwark London Borough Council v Logan Independent, 21 November 1995; Times, 03 November 1995
3 Nov 1995
CA

Housing
A Local Authority was not bound to re-house an applicant by its undertaking given to a tenant to move him.

 
Regina v Ealing London Borough Council Ex Parte Parkinson Times, 13 November 1995
13 Nov 1995
QBD

Housing, Local Government
A damages claim was wrong after a housing offer withdrawn for the applicant having made a fraudulent application.
Housing Act 1985 64


 
 Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Ermakov; CA 14-Nov-1995 - Times, 20 November 1995; [1996] 2 All ER 302; [1995] EWCA Civ 42; (1996) 28 HLR 819; [1996] COD 391; (1996) 8 Admin LR 389; [1996] 2 FCR 208; (1996) 160 JP Rep 814
 
Chin v Hackney London Borough Council Independent, 16 November 1995
16 Nov 1995
CA

Housing
A housing repairs damages claim settlement was not binding on a child in the house.

 
Svensson and Another v Ministre Du Logement et De L'Urbanisme Times, 29 November 1995; C-484/93; [1995] EUECJ C-484/93
29 Nov 1995
ECJ

Housing
The entitlement to housing benefit was wrongly tied to a requirement for a loan from a member state bank.
[ Bailii ]

 
 Drake v Whipp; CA 30-Nov-1995 - Times, 19 December 1995; [1996] 2 FCR 296; [1995] EWCA Civ 25; [1996] 2 FCR 296; (1996) 28 HLR 531; [1996] CLY 5780
 
Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society Plc v Norgan Gazette, 17 January 1996; Independent, 14 December 1995; Times, 08 December 1995; [1995] EWCA Civ 11; [1996] 1 WLR 343; [1996] 1 All ER 449
5 Dec 1995
CA
Evans, Waite LJJ, Sir John May
Consumer, Housing, Land
The starting point for assessing the period of time over which a court should order the repayment of arrears under a mortgage, when considering the need for a possession order, is the remaining balance of mortgage term.
Administration of Justice Act 1970 30 - Administration of Justice Act 1973 8
[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.