The applicant had been found to have deliberately procured her own eviction from her tenanted accommodation in Harrow. She was given temporary accommodation in a guest house, where she stayed for over a year. Her housing benefit was then reduced by half, on the basis that her rent was too high. The landlord then told her that she would be evicted. The authority now appealed against a judgment that she was not voluntarily homess.
Held: The decision was affirmed. Roch LJ, with whose judgment Aldous and Leggatt LJJ agreed, stated at pp 980-981 his agreement with the judge that the causal connection could be broken by events other than the acquisition of a ‘settled residence’, and that Bassett’s case was an example of such a situation.
Roch, Aldous, Leggatt LJJ
(1997) 29 HLR 974,  EWCA Civ 1191
England and Wales
Appeal from – Regina v London Borough of Harrow ex parte Fahia 1996
After deliberately losing her tenancy, the authority had provided the appliant with temporary accomodation in a guest house, but after her housing benefits were halved she lost that accomodation also.
Held: The authority had a duty to house . .
Appeal from – Regina v Harrow London Borough Council Ex Parte Fahia HL 16-Sep-1998
The local authority submitted first that a person making a second application for emergency housing had to demonstrate a change of circumstance which might lead to a second application being successful and second that it was for the local authority . .
Cited – Haile v London Borough of Waltham Forest SC 20-May-2015
‘The question in this case is whether the appellant falls within the scope of section 193 of the Housing Act 1996 as amended, which applies, by virtue of subsection (1), where the local housing authority are satisfied that ‘an applicant is homeless, . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 April 2021; Ref: scu.141587