Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua: CA 31 Mar 1994

Temporary housing may be treated as being settled, so an abandonment of it may be intentional homelessness.
The applicant had been accepted by Tower Hamlets as unintentionally homeless and in priority need, and given temporary accommodation. She refused a permanent place offered to her and was evicted. She applied to Brent who concluded that her refusal of accommodation made her intentionally homeless. Brent now appealed a finding against them.
Held: It was relevant when looking at the provision of public sector housing to the homeless, that an authority had previously accepted her as unintentionally homeless. It could not be assumed she would reject any offer made. Nevertheless Brent had to make its own assessment. It had asked itself the correct questions, not only whether she had acted reasonably in failing to accept an offer, but also whether the temporary accommodation was suitable. Appeal allowed.
Dillon, Leggatt, Henry LJJ
Independent 31-Mar-1994, Times 26-Apr-1994
Housing Act 1985 65
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Brent London Borough Council, Ex Parte Awua QBD 1-Jul-1993
A person refusing an offer of permanent accommodation was intentionally homeless. . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromRegina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte Awua HL 6-Jul-1995
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 . .
Appeal fromRegina (on the application of) Awua v Brent London Borough Council HL 6-Jul-1995
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.86190