The Council appealed from refusal of conditions it had attached on licensing houses wit multiple accommodation.
Held: The power to impose conditions under sections 64 and 67, Housing Act 2004, in order to make an HMO suitable for a particular number of households or persons, can be used so as to limit the class of persons for whom the HMO is suitable. The conditions imposed by the Tribunals and the Court of Appeal, considered cumulatively, in respect of the properties were entirely lawful. Accordingly, the court varied the conditions to delete the requirement of occupation for only ten months in each year but otherwise dismissed the appeal.
Lady Hale, President, Lord Wilson, Lord Carnwath, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones
[2018] UKSC 51, [2019] 1 All ER 1103, [2018] 1 WLR 4985, [2019] LLR 63, [2018] PTSR 1871, [2018] HLR 48, UKSC 2017/0073
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Video Summary, SC 2018 Jun 13 am Video, SC 2018 Jun 13 pm Video
Licensing and Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation and Other Houses (Miscellaneous Provisions) (England) Regulations 2006
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Nottingham City Council v Dominic Parr Trevor Parr Associates Ltd CA 29-Mar-2017
The court considered the extent of the power to impose conditions in licences of houses in multiple occupation. The FTT found that the conditions attached to the licences were incorrect and had substituted its own.
Held: The personal . .
Cited – Barnes v Sheffield City Council CA 1995
A group of five students was held to form a single household. The court identified the factors to assist in identifying whether a house was being occupied as a single household or not: the origin of the tenancy; whether the residents arrived in a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 September 2021; Ref: scu.625429
