The applicants who were Turkish, and had moved from England to Turkey in order to undertake a business activity there, but it had not proved successful and they then returned to England, and sought to be treated as homeless.
Held: The court accepted that ignorance as to the availability of accommodation on their return was capable of being a relevant fact when considering whether they were intentionally homeless.
Judges:
Roch J
Citations:
(1991) 23 HLR 260
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Ugiagbe v London Borough of Southwark CA 10-Feb-2009
The claimant said that the defendant had acted unlawfully in finding her to homeless intentionally. Her landlord had said that she was to leave. She sought housing but did not at first follow the homelessness procedure. She left the house though . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Housing
Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.286145