Leicester City Council v Shearer: CA 19 Nov 2013

Appeal by the Council against the dismissal of its claim for possession of a house in Leicester. The issues in this appeal are (i) whether the Council acted unlawfully in deciding to evict the widow of the former tenant and her two children without first considering the option of granting a fresh tenancy to the widow; (ii) whether the Council can rely upon procedural omissions by the widow in circumstances where the Council had misled her about what the procedure could achieve.

Jackson, Floyd LJJ, Sir David Keene
[2013] EWCA Civ 1467
Bailii
Housing Act 1996
England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 26 November 2021; Ref: scu.518036

Southwark London Borough Council v Williams: CA 1971

No Defence of Homelessness to Squatters

The defendants, in dire need of housing accommodation entered empty houses owned by the plaintiff local authority as squatters. The court considered the defence of necessity.
Held: The proper use of abandoned council properties is best determined by political decision making processes. Squatters, in urgent need of accommodation, could not claim a defence of necessity because the peril they found themselves in was ‘an obstinate and longstanding state of affairs’, rather than an immediate or emergent threat. The court denied that if a starving beggar takes the law into his own hands and steals food he is not guilty of theft.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘If homelessness were once admitted as a defence to trespass, no one’s house could be safe. Necessity would open a door no man could shut. It would not only be those in extreme need who would enter. There would be others who would imagine they were in need or would invent a need, so as to gain entry. The plea would be an excuse for all sorts of wrongdoing. So the courts must refuse to admit the plea of necessity to the hungry and the homeless: and trust that their distress will be relieved by the charitable and good.’
Edmund Davies LJ said: ‘But when and how far is the plea of necessity available to one who is prima facie guilty of tort? Well, one thing emerges with clarity from the decisions and that is that the law regards with the deepest suspicion any remedies of self-help and permits those remedies to be resorted to only in very special circumstances. The reason for such circumspection is clear -necessity can very easily become simply a mask for anarchy.’

Lord Denning MR, Edmund-Davies LJ
[1971] 1Ch 734, [1971] 2 All ER 175, [1971] 2 WLR 467
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedMonsanto Plc v Tilly and Others CA 30-Nov-1999
A group carried out direct action in protesting against GM crops by pulling up the plants. The group’s media liaison officer, while not actually pulling up plants himself, ‘reconnoitred the site the day before. He met the press at a prearranged . .
CitedIn Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) CA 22-Sep-2000
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The . .
CitedWhite v Withers Llp and Dearle CA 27-Oct-2009
The claimant was involved in matrimonial ancillary relief proceedings. His wife was advised by the defendants, her solicitors, to remove his private papers. The claimant now sought permission to appeal against a strike out of his claim against the . .
CitedRegina v Burns, Paul CACD 27-Apr-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction for assault. He had picked up a sex worker, driven away, but then changed his mind, and forcibly removed her from the car when she delayed. He now argued that he had the same right at common law to . .
CitedCity of London v Samede and Others QBD 18-Jan-2012
The claimant sought an order for possession of land outside St Paul’s cathedral occupied by the protestor defendants, consisting of ‘a large number of tents, between 150 and 200 at the time of the hearing, many of them used by protestors, either . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Crime, Housing, Land

Leading Case

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.183171

Nzolameso v City of Westminster: SC 2 Apr 2015

The court was asked ‘When is it lawful for a local housing authority to accommodate a homeless person a long way away from the authority’s own area where the homeless person was previously living? ‘ The claimant said that on applying for housing she had been rehoused outside the Borough and that the Coucil had failed to take proper account of her and of her children’s needs.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The decision that their duty to secure that accommodation was made available to her had come to an end must be quashed: ‘the authority cannot show that their offer of the property in Bletchley was sufficient to discharge their legal obligations towards the appellant under the 1996 Act. Moreover, their notification to the appellant that their duty towards her had come to an end was purportedly given in circumstances where she did not know, and had no means of knowing, what, if any, consideration had been given to providing accommodation in or nearer to the borough, apart from the general standard paragraph in the letter offering her the Bletchley accommodation the previous day.’

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes, Lord Toulson
[2015] UKSC 22, [2015] WLR(D) 165, [2015] PTSR 549, [2015] 2 WLR 813, [2015] 2 All ER 942, (2015) 18 CCL Rep 201, [2015] BLGR 215, [2015] HLR 22, UKSC 2014/0275
Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary
Housing Act 1996
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Newham London Borough Council, ex parte Sacupima and others CA 1-Dec-2000
Where a local authority had to decide whether temporary housing was suitable for a family who had applied under the homelessness provisions, the location of the short-term housing was relevant. In this case, a London authority, placing a family in . .
Appeal fromNzolameso v City of Westminster CA 22-Oct-2014
The authority accepted that it owed a duty to house the appellant, and that she was unable to afford the rents payable on housing within the district after reductions in housing benefits. She was offered but refused, housing im Milton Keynes. . .
CitedRegina v Sacupima and Others, Ex Parte Newham London Borough Council QBD 26-Nov-1999
A local authority decide to provide temporary accommodation for homeless applicants outside its area in assorted seaside towns, pending a final decision on their cases. This general policy was unlawful, since the authority had failed to consider . .
CitedYumsak v London Borough of Enfield Admn 2002
The court will not readily interfere with the approach of a housing authority to the question of suitability, although in an appropriate case it plainly will. . .
CitedCalgin, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Enfield Admn 29-Jul-2005
The claimant complained that having applied for housing in the borough they had in fact housed him outside the borough.
Held: The authority had a duty to house the applicant so far it was reasonably practicable within its borders. The policy . .
CitedRuiz Zambrano (European Citizenship) ECJ 8-Mar-2011
ECJ Citizenship of the Union – Article 20 TFEU – Grant of right of residence under European Union law to a minor child on the territory of the Member State of which that child is a national, irrespective of the . .
CitedCastle and Others v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis Admn 8-Sep-2011
The claimants, all under 17 years old, took a peaceful part in a substantial but disorderly demonstration in London. The police decided to contain the section of crowd which included the claimants. The claimants said that the containment of children . .
CitedHuzrat v London Borough of Hounslow CA 21-Nov-2013
The applicant sought housing as a homeless person.
Held: Moses LJ said: ‘The statutory questions are clear; was the action or omission in question deliberate? The answer to that question cannot differ [according to] whether the local authority . .
CitedZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 1-Feb-2011
The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return . .
CitedHH v Deputy Prosecutor of The Italian Republic, Genoa SC 20-Jun-2012
In each case the defendant sought to resist European Extradition Warrants saying that an order would be a disporportionate interference in their human right to family life. The Court asked whether its approach as set out in Norris, had to be amended . .
CitedStevens v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another Admn 10-Apr-2013
The court was asked as to important issues as the approach of both planning decision-makers and the court to proportionality in circumstances in which a planning decision engages the right to respect for family life under article 8 of the European . .
CitedCollins v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another CA 9-Oct-2013
The claimant, seeking permission to use land as a gypsy and travellers’ camp site, appealed against rejection of his request for the quashing of the inspector’s report approving an enforcement notice. . .
CitedHines v London Borough of Lambeth CA 20-May-2014
The child applicant sought housing assistance.
Held: The child’s welfare had obviously to be taken into account, but it could not be the paramount consideration as this would be inconsistent with the statutory language. . .
CitedRoyal Mail Group Plc v The Consumer Council for Postal Services CA 7-Mar-2007
The Royal Mail appealed a grant of judicial review of the decision of the Post regulator not to penalise the company for its failure to meet its service conditions as regards enforcement of credit terms for bulk mail customers.
Held: The . .
CitedRegina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz HL 13-Oct-2005
The claimant was detained in a secure Mental Hospital. He complained at the seclusions policy applied by the hospital, saying that it departed from the Guidance issued for such policies by the Secretary of State under the Act.
Held: The House . .
CitedCalgin, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Enfield Admn 29-Jul-2005
The claimant complained that having applied for housing in the borough they had in fact housed him outside the borough.
Held: The authority had a duty to house the applicant so far it was reasonably practicable within its borders. The policy . .
CitedRegina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Ermakov CA 14-Nov-1995
The applicant, having moved here from Greece, applied for emergency housing. The Council received no reply to its requests for corroboration sent to Greece. Housing was refused, but the officer later suggested that the real reason was that the . .
CitedLondon Borough of Newham v Khatun, Zeb and Iqbal CA 24-Feb-2004
The council made offers of accommodation which were rejected as inappropriate by the proposed tenants.
Held: The council was given a responsibility to act reasonably. It was for them, not the court to make that assessment subject only to . .

Cited by:
CitedPoshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 10-May-2017
The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government

Leading Case

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.545697

Begum (Nipa) v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council: CA 1 Nov 1999

The fact that the accommodation found to be available to the applicant for housing was in Bangladesh did not make it unavailable in law. The subsections must be read separately. Accommodation could be available to the applicant even though she could not afford to travel to it. The power of the County Court to hear an appeal in such matters included the power to deal with all matters which might be heard in the High Court, including those equivalent to judicial review. The Code is not an authoritative guide to interpretation of the Act.
Auld LJ summarised what is meant by an appeal on a point of law in the context of section 204(3):- ‘It is that ‘a point of law’ includes not only matters of legal interpretation but also the full range of issues which would otherwise be the subject of an application to the High Court for judicial review, such as procedural error and questions of vires, to which I add, also of irrationality and (in) adequacy of reasons. This broad construction of the provision is supported by the somewhat wider or more immediate power to vary given to the county court by section 204(3) than the High Court normally exercises in its judicial review jurisdiction.’

Auld, Stuart-Smith, Sedley LJJ
Gazette 17-Nov-1999, Times 09-Nov-1999, [2000] 1 WLR 306, [1999] EWCA Civ 3051, [2000] COD 31, (2000) 32 HLR 445
Bailii
Housing Act 1985 175 (1) 175(3) 204(3)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v London Borough of Camden ex parte Pereira CA 20-May-1998
When considering whether a person was vulnerable so as to be treated more favourably in applying for rehousing: ‘The Council should consider such application afresh applying the statutory criterion: The Ortiz test should not be used; the dictum of . .

Cited by:
CitedHarouki v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea CA 17-Oct-2007
The applicant sought housing as a homeles person. Her present accommodation for herself, her husband and five children was so overcrowded that continued occupation was a criminal offence. She appealed a finding that it was reasonable to continue . .
CitedLondon Borough of Wandsworth v Allison CA 15-Apr-2008
The claimant had applied for emergency housing, saying that he had suffered a deep vein thrombosis, and was vulnerable under the 1996 Act. The authority said that its finding that the VT would not put him at additional risk if homeless, was one of . .
CitedWaltham Forest v Maloba, The Law Society CA 4-Dec-2007
The applicant had been refused accomodation as homeless after disclosing the ownership of a family home in Uganda. He had lived and worked in the UK for 15 years. The authority did not accept that it had later been repossessed. The council now . .
CitedHotak and Others v London Borough of Southwark and Another SC 13-May-2015
The court was asked as to the duty of local housing authorities towards homeless people who claim to be ‘vulnerable’, and therefore to have ‘a priority need’ for the provision of housing accommodation under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996. Those . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Litigation Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.78321

Nemcova v Fairfield Rents Ltd: UTLC 6 Sep 2016

Holiday lets were in breach of covenant

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – BREACH OF COVENANT – long residential lease – application under section 168(2), Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2003 – covenant not to use premises for any purpose other than as a private residence – whether broken when tenant advertised and granted short-term lettings – appeal dismissed

[2016] UKUT 303 (LC)
Bailii
Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2003 &168(2)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromFairfield Rents Limited v Nemcova (London) FTTPC 26-Aug-2015
Application Under Section 168, of The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 . .

Cited by:
CitedTriplerose Ltd v Beattie and Another UTLC 4-Jun-2020
Short term visitor sublets were breach of lease
Landlord and Tenant – Breach of Covenant – covenant against use of flat other than as a private dwelling house and prohibiting use for trade or business – whether breached by use of flat as serviced apartment advertised on internet booking sites – . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.569592

London Borough of Islington v The Unite Group Plc: Admn 22 Mar 2013

The Council sought a declaration that certain accomodation provided by the defendant constituted housing in multiple accomodation (HMO), and that it therefore required a licence from the Council under the 2004 Act. There were two storeys of business accomodation, and one of residential. The parties disputed whether, in counting the number of storeys in the building, the basement and attic were to be included.
Held: The application was dismissed. In all respects other than business premises the search was for storeys comprised within the HMO itself, rather than the building in which it was located; it was the HMO which was in issue, and not the building itself, and ‘It is the HMO that must comprise the three storeys and not the building in which an HMO happens to be found.’
The court should ‘strive to avoid a construction which penalises a person where the legislator’s intention to do is doubtful, or penalises him or her in a way which was not made clear’.

Blake J
[2013] EWHC 508 (Admin)
Bailii
Housing Act 2004
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBristol City Council v Digs (Bristol) Ltd Admn 27-Mar-2014
The council appealed against rejection of its complaint that the defendant had used their maisonette as a house in in multiple occupation without first obtaining the licence required. The parties had disputed whether two maisonettes amounted to more . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.471962

ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham: SC 12 Nov 2014

The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under Part VII of the 1996 Act, and (ii) whether a public authority, which evicts such a person when its statutory duty to provide such interim accommodation ceases without first obtaining a court order for possession, violates that person’s rights under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Held: The authority was not required to obtain a court order before evicting the claimants if, after making inquiries, it then decided that the claimants were not entitled to local authority accommodation.
‘(i) the words ‘live at’, ‘reside’ and ‘dwell’ are ordinary words of the English language and do not have technical meanings, (ii) those words must be interpreted in the statutes in which they appear having regard to the purpose of those enactments, (iii) as a matter of nuance, ‘dwelling’ as a general rule suggests a more settled occupation than ‘residence’ and can be equated with one’s home, although ‘residence’ itself can in certain contexts (such as the two-home cases) require such an equation, and (iv) under the 1996 Act a person remains homeless while he or she occupies temporary accommodation provided under sections 188(3), 190(2), 200(1) or 204(4) of the 1996 Act so long as the occupation is properly referable to the authority’s performance or exercise of those statutory duties or powers.’

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Carnwath, Lord Toulson, Lord Hodge
[2014] WLR(D) 489, [2015] 1 AC 1259, [2014] UKSC 62, [2014] 3 WLR 1548, UKSC 2013/0194, [2014] BLGR 842, [2015] 1 All ER 783, [2015] HLR 6
Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC Video, SC, SC Summary
Protection from Eviction Act 1977, European Convention on Human Rights, Housing Act 1996
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromCN, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Lewisham CA 11-Jul-2013
The claimants had applied for housing as homeless. They were given accommodation pending the authority’s final decisions. Those decisions were thet the claimants were homeless intentionally. The authoity’s set out to recover possession. The . .
Appeal fromZH, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Newham CA 11-Jul-2013
The claimant had applied for housing as a homeless person and was found temporary accomodation pending the respondent’s decision. When eventually the decision went against the claimant, the claimant argued that the authority was obliged to recover . .
CitedWolfe v Hogan CA 1949
An issue arose as to the purpose of the original letting. The defendant was the sub-tenant of a large divided room on the ground floor of a house in Chelsea which she used for business purposes. She eventually decided to live there as well.
CitedRogerson v Wigan Metropolican Borough Council QBD 14-Jul-2004
The claimant sought damages under the 1977 Act. The defendant said it had behaved lawfully. He had been housed in a hostel pending a decision on the application for permanent housing as a homeless person, which the defendant said excluded him from . .
CitedMartin Estates Ltd v Watt and Hunter CANI 1925
Barracks were leased for police purposes to a receiver for the Royal Ulster Constabulary. On expiry the landlord moved for possession. The tenant resisted, citing legislation enacted to protect tenants of houses from disturbance in their occupation. . .
CitedSkinner v Geary CA 1931
Scrutton LJ said that the Rent Acts did not protect a tenant who was not in occupation of a house in the sense that the house was his home. . .
CitedLevermore v Jobey CA 1956
Danckwerts LJ said: ‘A lease is not intended to be either a mental exercise or an essay in literature: it is a practical document dealing with a practical situation.’ . .
CitedUratemp Ventures Limited v Collins HL 11-Oct-2001
Can a single room within a hotel comprise a separate dwelling within the 1988 Act and be subject to an assured tenancy?
Held: A single room can be a dwelling. Each case must be interpreted in its own light as a question of fact, but respecting . .
CitedBirmingham City Council v Ali and Others; Moran v Manchester City Council HL 1-Jul-2009
Homelessness Status Requires LA Action
The House considered appeals challenging whether local authorities who gave unacceptable housing to the homeless had satisfied their obligations to them as homeless people. What was meant by the phrase ‘accommodation which it would be reasonable for . .
CitedCollier v Stoneman CA 1957
A grandchild and his wife shared a 2-bedroom flat with the grandmother tenant. There was communal living and eating and no question of a sub-tenancy.
Held: The claim to succession to the tenancy was upheld.
Sellers LJ said: ‘The . .
CitedWalker v Ogilvy CA 1974
A tenant of a flat which he used principally at weekends and for short holidays. The tenant had another permanent residence.
Held: Parliament in passing the Rent Act 1968 never intended to protect people in occupation of what were in effect . .
CitedRegalian Securities Ltd v Scheuer CA 1982
The court considered the right of a protected tenant to become a statutory tenant on the termination of his protected tenancy under section 2(1)(a) of the 1977 Act, requiring him to occupy the dwelling house ‘as his residence’. The tenant occupied . .
CitedSwanbrae Ltd v Elliott CA 1986
The court considered the quality of residence required where a person claimed to be a statutory tenant in succession to her mother, who had been a protected tenant, because she had resided in the premises with her before she died. The appellant had . .
CitedMacMillan and Co Ltd v Rees CA 1946
The lease of premises as an office allowed the tenant or her business partner were authorised to sleep when required.
Held: The Court drew a distinction between an authorised user of merely sleeping or eating on premises and use as a dwelling . .
CitedMohamed v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council HL 1-Nov-2001
Mrs M came to England in 1994 living first in Ealing and then Hammersmith. Mr M came later and lived elsewhere in Hammersmith. Hammersmith gave them jointly temporary accommodation, first in a hotel and then in a flat. They then applied under . .
CitedDesnousse v London Borough of Newham and others CA 17-May-2006
The occupier had been granted a temporary licence by the authority under the homelessness provisions whilst it made its assessment. The assessment concluded that she had become homeless intentionally, and therefore terminated the licence and set out . .
CitedFreeman v London Borough of Islington CA 11-Jun-2009
A claim was made for a statutory succession to an assured tenancy. The judge had found that the appellant was occupying the flat at the time of the death of her father (the tenant) as her only home, but that she had not ‘resided with’ him throughout . .
CitedLondon Borough of Hounslow v Powell, Leeds City Council v Hall etc SC 23-Feb-2011
In each case the tenant occupied the property as his home, but was not a secure tenant of the local authority. The Court was asked whether, in granting a possession order in such a case, the court was obliged to consider the proportionality of the . .
CitedZehentner v Austria ECHR 16-Jul-2009
ECHR The applicant’s apartment was subject to a judicial sale for non-payment of debt. She was ill, and did not participate in the sale. The local law had time limits for challenging a judicial sale, designed to . .
CitedTysiac v Poland ECHR 20-Mar-2007
The applicant alleged that the circumstances of her case had given rise to violations of Article 8 of the Convention. She also relied on Article 3. The applicant further complained under Article 13 that she did not have an effective remedy at her . .
CitedProkopovich v Russia ECHR 18-Nov-2004
ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Preliminary objection rejected (estoppel); Violation of Art. 8; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial . .
CitedBlecic v Croatia ECHR 29-Jul-2004
The applicant had for many years before 1992 had a protected tenancy of a publicly-owned flat in Zadar. Under Croatian law a specially-protected tenancy might be terminated if the tenant ceased to occupy the flat for a continuous period of six . .
CitedBarras v Aberdeen Steam Trawling and Fishing Co HL 17-Mar-1933
The court looked at the inference that a statute’s draughtsman could be assumed when using a phrase to rely on a known interpretation of that phrase.
Viscount Buckmaster said: ‘It has long been a well established principle to be applied in the . .
CitedSmart v The London Borough of Lambeth CA 7-Nov-2013
A local authority granted a licence to a housing association which in turn allowed a housing cooperative to provide accommodation to former squatters on a licence which was initially for 5 years but was extended. A claim was made for adverse . .

Cited by:
CitedSims v Dacorum Borough Council SC 12-Nov-2014
Surrender at Common Law Survives Human Rights Law
The tenants held a secure weekly tenancy of the respondent under a joint tenancy. After a relationship breakdown, Mrs Sims had given notice to quit. Mr Sims, left in possession now argued that the common law rules should not be allowed to deprive . .
CitedHaile 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, . .
CitedBelhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.538699

Cocks v Thanet District Council: HL 25 Nov 1981

The applicant had been given temporary accomodation under the Act. He sought to enforce the obligation on the respondent to house him permanently by an action in the county court. The authority said the action should have been by judicial review.
Held: Where the action impugned the authority’s performance of its statutory duties as a pre-condition to enforcing private law rights, the correct way was to do so within judicial review proceedings. The authority’s decision could not be challenged by an ordinary action. The House attached particular importance to the protection given to public authorities by Order 53 of the Rules of the Supreme Court to the extent that leave to bring proceedings was required and a time limit imposed subject to good reason for extending it.

Lord Bridge
[1983] 2 AC 286, [1982] 3 WLR 1121, [1982] 3 All ER 1135, [1981] UKHL 10
Bailii
Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977
England and Wales
Citing:
AppliedO’Reilly v Mackman HL 1982
Remission of Sentence is a Privilege not a Right
The plaintiffs had begun their action, to challenge their loss of remission as prisoners, by means of a writ, rather than by an action for judicial review, and so had sidestepped the requirement for the action to be brought within strict time . .

Cited by:
AppliedO’Rourke v Mayor etc of the London Borough of Camden HL 12-Jun-1997
The claimant had been released from prison and sought to be housed as a homeless person. He said that his imprisonment brought him within the category of having special need. He also claimed damages for the breach.
Held: The Act was intended . .
CitedSteed v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 26-May-2000
The claimant surrendered guns and ammunition under the 1997 Act, and was due to be compensated. His claim was not settled, and he commenced an action in the County Court for the sums claimed. The defendant denied any duty to pay up within a . .
CitedMohamed v Manek and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea CA 28-Apr-1995
The claimant applied to the Council for accommodation, claiming to be homeless and in priority need. The council housed him in a hotel owned by Mr Manek in Tooting Bec . He had a room, a separate bathroom and lavatory, and shared use of a kitchen. . .
CitedHussain v Mehlman CC 5-Mar-1992
(County Court) The defendant landlord granted the plaintiff a three year assured shorthold tenancy. He now appealed a finding that he was in breach of an implied covenant to maintain the space heating, and otherwise. The tenant had returned the . .
CitedRuddy v Chief Constable, Strathclyde Police and Another SC 28-Nov-2012
The pursuer said that he had been assaulted whilst in the custody of the responder’s officers. He began civil actions after his complaint was rejected. He repeated the allegation of the assault, and complained also as to the conduct of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Judicial Review

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.180465

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 to decide whether that test has to be satisfied. The applicant could not point to any new circumstance, which could lead to the conclusion that she was not intentionally homeless and it was releived of any obligation to repeat the whole process of considering the fresh application.
Held: ”I have sympathy with Harrow’s case on this point but I am unable to extract from the statutory language any sufficient justification for the suggested short cut.’ ‘the statutory duty to make enquiries arises if (a) a person applies for accommodation (b) ‘the authority have reason to believe he may be homeless or threatened with homelessness’. It is established that requirement (a) is not satisfied if an application purports to be made by a person who lacks the capacity to do so . . Moreover when an applicant has been given temporary accommodation . . . and is then found to be intentionally homeless he cannot make a further application based on exactly the same facts as his earlier application’. A local authority Council had found intentional homelessness but where an appeal was pending had to consider fully again, the situation which arose on applicant being evicted again from temporary accommodation provided pending the appeal. As to Delahaye: ‘but those are very special cases where it is possible to say there is no application before the local authority and therefore the mandatory duty imposed by [the statutory predecessor to section 184] has not arisen. But in the present case there is no doubt that where [the homeless applicant] made her further application for accommodation she was threatened with homelessness. Moreover in my judgment her application could not be treated as identical with the earlier 1994 application. She was relying on her eviction from the guesthouse which, for one year, she had been occupying as the direct licensee of the guesthouse proprietor, paying the rate for that accommodation. She was reimbursed the amount of the rent by way of housing benefit but the fact was that she had occupied the premises as licensee for a year. It is impossible to say that there has been no relevant change in circumstances at all.’

Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Mustill, Lord Nolan, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton
Times 24-Jul-1998, Gazette 16-Sep-1998, [1998] 4 All ER 137, [1998] UKHL 29, [1998] 1 WLR 1396
House of Lords, Bailii
Housing Act 1985 Part III
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v London Borough of Harrow ex parte Fahia CA 7-Mar-1997
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 . .
CitedDelahaye v Oswestry Borough Council 29-Jul-1980
The applicant had made more than one application for emergency housing and temporary accomodation pending the result of her application.
Held: It could not have been the intention of Parliament that a similar statute should be used by someone, . .
At First InstanceRegina 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 . .

Cited by:
CitedRegina (Fatima Jeylani) v London Borough of Waltham Forest 2002
A declaration was granted requiring the local authority to consider the further homelessness application after the authority had followed the approach in Campisi and in consequence, it had refused to consider a further homelessness application of . .
CitedHaile 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, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.86819

Rother District Council v Freeman-Roach: CA 6 Mar 2018

Onus on Housing claimant to show review error

The claimant had been found to be homeless and in priority need. He was given interim housing pending their decision. They later considered that he was in fact not in priority need. He appealed to the County Court for an order that interim accomodation be continued pending completion of the review, that having been refused by the review officer.
Held: The Council’s appeal succeeded. It was for the claimant to establish the error made in the review, not for the Council to establish that the correct test had been applied.

Longmore, Lewison LJJ, Rose J
[2018] EWCA Civ 368, [2018] WLR(D) 145
Bailii, WLRD
Housing Act 1996
England and Wales

Housing

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.605788

Royal Borough of Greenwich v Tuitt: CA 25 Nov 2014

The Defendant appealed against the order for possession made against her in respect of her secure tenancy of a flat, made on the grounds that her son, now 18 years old and living with her and her partner, had committed repeated acts of nuisance and annoyance to neighbouring residents and had been convicted of an indictable offence committed in the locality. The Defendant contented that a consideration of the lack of allegations of nuisance directed at the Defendant was omitted from the judgment.
Held: The appeal failed.
Vos LJ said: ‘the question of reasonableness focuses, as section 85A requires, on the effect of the nuisance and annoyance on others, not on the direct responsibility for the nuisance and annoyance. The judge must, however, take account of all relevant circumstances in a broad, common-sense way. Such circumstances will, even in relation to reasonableness, include, in a general way, the responsibility of the tenant for the nuisance. One reason for that in this case is that ground 1 relates specifically to contractual breaches of the tenancy agreement.’ The judge had, however satisfied these requirements.
The Defendant had not said that she would exclude her son if his behaviour persisted, but was instead in denial.

Vos, Treacy, McCombe LJJ
[2014] EWCA Civ 1669
Bailii
Housing Act 1985 84 85A
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedNewcastle City Council v Morrison CA 2000
The court reviewed the principles applicable when asking whether it is reasonable to make an order for possession against a tenant on grounds of nuisance: a) When considering reasonableness, the Judge must take account of all relevant circumstances . .
CitedPortsmouth City Council v Bryant CA 2000
It may be unreasonable to impose a possession order against a person in respect of a failing over which they have no control.
Simon Brown LJ said, having reviewed the existing authorities: ‘Those authorities clearly hold that no personal fault . .
CitedKnowsley Housing Trust v McMullen CA 9-May-2006
The defendant tenant appealed an order for possession of her flat. She was disabled and living with her 19 year old son. He had been made subject to an anti-social behaviour order. The court had found that she could have required him to leave. The . .
CitedBirmingham City Council v Ashton CA 29-Nov-2012
The council challenged a decision as to their claim for possession of a ground floor flat where the court granted a possession order but suspended possession on terms that the Respondent (1) complied with his tenancy agreement and (2) obeyed the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.540486

Curl v Angelo: CA 1948

Two rooms were let to the proprietor of an adjoining hotel as additional accommodation for the hotel. They were used mainly for guests but occasionally for the hotel tenant’s family or staff. One such claimed security of tenure.
Held: The claim failed. The room was not let as a dwelling: ‘the real fundamental object of the Act’ was in ‘protecting a tenant from being turned out of his home.’ The tenant’s claim for protection was rejected on the ground that the premises were not a dwelling. They were not ‘the home of anybody; they were a mere annexe or overflow of the hotel.’ However, a single room may be a dwelling-house.
Lord Greene MR said: ‘It must not be thought for a moment that I am throwing any doubt on the proposition that where there is a letting to a man of one room which is the only place where he moves and has his being, that circumstance will prevent the room being a ‘dwelling’ within the meaning of the Act, but here one has the activities connected with the dwelling of all these people divided between two tenements. Their main activities of living are conducted in the hotel. They go out to sleep in these rooms – sometimes the guests, sometimes the servants, and so on. Where is the ‘dwelling’? It seems to me clear that this annexe or accretion to the accommodation of the hotel cannot be regarded as a ‘dwelling,’ much less as a ‘separate dwelling.”

Lord Greene MR
[1948] 2 All ER 189
Rent Restriction Act
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedUratemp Ventures Limited v Collins HL 11-Oct-2001
Can a single room within a hotel comprise a separate dwelling within the 1988 Act and be subject to an assured tenancy?
Held: A single room can be a dwelling. Each case must be interpreted in its own light as a question of fact, but respecting . .
CitedA G Securities v Vaughan; Antoniades v Villiers and Bridger HL 10-Nov-1988
In Antoniades, the two tenants occupied an attic, living together. Each had at the same time signed identical agreements purporting to create licences. The landlord had reserved to himself the right to occupy the property and to allow others to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.181201

Dyson Holdings Ltd v Fox: CA 17 Oct 1975

The defendant had lived with the tenant for 21 years until his death. They were unmarried and had no children. Reversing the County Court judge, the Court of Appeal ruled that she was a member of his family. It was absurd to distinguish between two couples on the basis that one had children and the other did not. (Lord Denning) and ‘The popular meaning given to the word ‘family’ is not fixed once and for all time. I have no doubt that with the passage of years it has changed. The cases reveal that it is not restricted to blood relationships and those created by the marriage ceremony. It can include de facto as well as de jure relationships. The popular meaning of ‘family’ in 1975 would, according to the answer of the ordinary man, include the defendant as a member of Mr. Wright’s family. This is not to say that every mistress should be so regarded. Relationships of a casual or intermittent character and those bearing indications of impermanence would not come within the popular concept of a family unit.’ per James LJ, and ‘Now, it is, I think, not putting it too high to say that between 1950 and 1975 there has been a complete revolution in society’s attitude to unmarried partnerships of the kind under consideration. Such unions are far commoner than they used to be. The social stigma that once attached to them has almost, if not entirely, disappeared. The inaccurate but expressive phrases ‘common law wife’ and ‘common law husband’ have come into general use to describe them. The ordinary man in 1975 would, in my opinion, certainly say that the parties to such a union, provided it had the appropriate degree of apparent permanence and stability, were members of a single family whether they had children or not.’ (Bridge LJ)

Lord Denning MR, James LJ, Bridge LJ
[1976] QB 503, [1975] EWCA Civ 8
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
DisapprovedGammans v Ekins CA 1950
The plaintiff had lived with a woman tenant for over 20 years and they had been regarded in the neighbourhood as man and wife.
Held: He could not thereby be deemed a member of her family for the Act of 1920. If their relationship was sexual . .

Cited by:
Confined to its factsHelby v Rafferty CA 1979
The court declined to hold that a man who had lived with a woman tenant for five years before her death were part of the same family because they had deliberately opted to retain their formal independence and they had not been recognised as being . .
Confined to its factsWatson v Lucas CA 1980
A woman who had lived with a man, although he remained married to his wife, was a member of his family for the purpose of Schedule 1 to the Act of 1977 because of the lasting relationship between them. . .
CitedCarega Properties SA (formerly Joram Developments Ltd) v Sharratt HL 1979
A widow aged 75 had developed a platonic relationship with a young man aged 24. He lived in her flat for nearly 20 years until she died. They treated themselves as aunt and nephew. The trial judge held that through their relationship this elderly . .
CitedFitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd HL 28-Oct-1999
Same Sex Paartner to Inherit as Family Member
The claimant had lived with the original tenant in a stable and long standing homosexual relationship at the deceased’s flat. After the tenant’s death he sought a statutory tenancy as a spouse of the deceased. The Act had been extended to include as . .
CitedSecretary of State for Work and Pensions v M HL 8-Mar-2006
The respondent’s child lived with the estranged father for most of each week. She was obliged to contribute child support. She now lived with a woman, and complained that because her relationship was homosexual, she had been asked to pay more than . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Housing

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.215911

Runa Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (First Secretary of State intervening): HL 13 Feb 2003

The appellant challenged the procedure for reviewing a decision made as to the suitability of accomodation offered to her after the respondent had accepted her as being homeless. The procedure involved a review by an officer of the council, with an appeal to the County Court on a point of law.
Held: The decision was one which did engage the applicant’s human rights. The officer was not an independent tribunal, but his decision was of the nature recognised in the jurisprudence as administrative, being areas of law considered regulatory and welfare schemes in which decision making was by custom delegated to administrative officers, and such decisions typically did not give rise to a right of appeal on the facts. The appeal on law was adequate.

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Millett, Lord Walker
[2003] UKHL 5, [2003] 1 All ER 739, Gazette 03-Apr-2003, [2003] 2 WLR 388, [2003] 2 AC 430, [2003] ACD 41, [2003] NPC 21, [2003] HRLR 16, [2003] HLR 32, [2003] UKHRR 419, [2003] BLGR 205, 14 BHRC 400, [2003] Hous LR 20
House of Lords, Bailii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1, Housing Act 1996 204, Local Authorities (Contracting Out of Allocation of Housing and Homelessness Functions) Order 1996 (1996 No 3205, Allocation of Homelessness Functions (review Procedures) Regulations 1999 (1999 No 71)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBryan v The United Kingdom ECHR 22-Nov-1995
Bryan was a farmer at Warrington in Cheshire. He built two brick buildings on land in a conservation area without planning permission and the planning authority served an enforcement notice for their demolition. He appealed on grounds (a) (that . .
Appeal fromLondon Borough of Tower Hamlets v Runa Begum CA 6-Mar-2002
The applicant had applied for rehousing as a homeless person. She was offered interim accommodation but refused it. Her case was reviewed, and her reasons rejected. She claimed the procedure was unfair, in that the authority was looking at decisions . .
CitedRegina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .
CitedLondon Borough of Newham v Adan CA 14-Dec-2001
The applicant was a Dutch national. She appealed for housing as a homeless person. The local authority, after review found her not to have a settled intention to stay in England. She appealed, to the County Court, and succeeded, and the Authority . .
CitedKingsley v The United Kingdom (No 2) ECHR 28-May-2002
The finding that a party had been denied a fair trial may of itself be sufficient compensation. The applicant had been excluded from management of licensed casinos. The appeal board had been found to have given the appearance of bias against him. . .
CitedThe Secretary of State for Health, Dorset County Council v The Personal Representative of Christopher Beeson CA 18-Dec-2002
The deceased had been adjudged by his local authority to have deprived himself of his house under the Regulations. Complaint was made that the procedure did not allow an appeal and therefore deprived him of his rights under article 6.
Held: . .
CitedKaplan v United Kingdom ECHR 14-Dec-1978
(Admissibility) The Secretary of State had, after preliminary procedures, served notices on an insurance company disallowing it from writing any new business, because its managing director the applicant, had been found not to be a fit and proper . .

Cited by:
CitedDyson Limited v The Registrar of Trade Marks ChD 15-May-2003
Applications for trade marks on behalf of the claimant had been rejected. Acquired distinctiveness was a significant issue, and the question of whether the appeal was a review or a rehearing was significant. In this appeal, the parties had given . .
CitedLondon Borough of Harrow v Qazi HL 31-Jul-2003
The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and . .
CitedSecretary of State for Work and Pensions v Kehoe CA 5-Mar-2004
The claimant had applied to the Child Support Agncy for maintenance. They failed utterly to obtain payment, and she complained now that she was denied the opportunity by the 1991 Act to take court proceedings herself.
Held: The denial of . .
CitedIndependent Assessor v O’Brien, Hickey, Hickey CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimants had been imprisoned for many years before their convictions were quashed. They claimed compensation under the Act. The assessor said that there should be deducted from the award the living expenses they would have incurred if they had . .
CitedFeld, Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster v London Borough of Barnet, Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster CA 18-Oct-2004
The applicants sought housing as homeless people. After the refusal of their applications, they sought a review, and in due course a second review. That second review was conducted by the same officer who had conducted the first. The appellant . .
CitedHall v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 17-Dec-2004
The applicants appealed refusal of their applications for housing having priority housing need being vulnerable because of their mental illness. They said that the original decisions had been reviewed, and that on review deficiencies had been . .
CitedKehoe, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 14-Jul-2005
The applicant contended that the 1991 Act infringed her human rights in denying her access to court to obtain maintenance for her children.
Held: The applicant had no substantive right to take part in the enforcement process in domestic law . .
CitedCramp v Hastings Borough Council CA 29-Jul-2005
Cases challenged successful appeals by applicants for housing for homelessness, where a county court had ordered a second review of the application. . .
CitedHammond, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 1-Dec-2005
The claimants had been convicted of murder, but their tariffs had not yet been set when the 2003 Act came into effect. They said that the procedure under which their sentence tarriffs were set were not compliant with their human rights in that the . .
CitedMB, Re, Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB Admn 12-Apr-2006
The applicant challenged the terms of a non-derogating control order. It was anticipated that unless prevented, he would fight against UK forces in Iraq.
Held: The section allowed the Secretary of State to impose any necessary conditions, but . .
CitedMalik, Regina (on the Application of) v Waltham Forest PCT and Secretary of State for Health Admn 17-Mar-2006
The doctor had been suspended on full pay whilst allegations against him were investigated. He claimed that the suspension infringed his human rights and that his licence to practice was a possession.
Held: At the disciplinary proceedings: . .
CitedDesnousse v London Borough of Newham and others CA 17-May-2006
The occupier had been granted a temporary licence by the authority under the homelessness provisions whilst it made its assessment. The assessment concluded that she had become homeless intentionally, and therefore terminated the licence and set out . .
CitedF v Birmingham City Council CA 2-Nov-2006
The applicant sought housing as a homeless person with her children. The authority found her in priority need, but intentionally homeless. Her appeal against the adverse review failed, and she appealed again. She had given up a council flat and had . .
CitedAli v Birmingham City Council CA 7-Nov-2008
The Council said that it had discharged its duty to house the claimants after they had refused an offer of accommodation, and that decision had been reviewed. The claimant denied receiving a notice under the procedure. The court was asked whether . .
CitedWright and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another HL 21-Jan-2009
The claimants had been provisionally listed as ‘people considered unsuitable to work with vulnerable adults’ which meant that they could no longer work, but they said they were given no effective and speedy opportunity to object to the listing. . .
CitedHeald and Others v London Borough of Brent CA 20-Aug-2009
The court considered whether it was lawful for a local authority to outsource the decision making on homelessness reviews. The appellants said that it could not be contracted out, and that the agent employed lacked the necessary independence and was . .
CitedA, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon SC 26-Nov-2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined.
Held: The claimants’ appeals . .
CitedG, Regina (on The Application of) v X School and Others CA 20-Jan-2010
The claimant was a teaching assistant. A complaint had been made that he had kissed a boy having work experience at the school, but it had been decided that no criminal prosecution would follow. He sought judicial review of the school’s decision to . .
CitedTomlinson and Others v Birmingham City Council SC 17-Feb-2010
The appellant asked whether the statutory review of a housing authority’s decision on whether he was intentionally homeless was a determination of a civil right, and if so whether the review was of the appropriate standard. The claimant said that . .
CitedCart, Regina (on The Application of) v The Upper Tribunal and Others CA 23-Jul-2010
The claimant had sought and been refused judicial review of a decision of the SIAC Upper Tribunal. The Upper Tribunals were designated as courts of superior record, and the court at first instance had said that SIACs specialist procedures and . .
CitedBubb v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 9-Nov-2011
The appellant had sought housing assistance. She had been offered accomodation but refused it as unreasonable. The authority declined further assistance. She now appealed against the refusal of the county court judge to set aside the decision . .
CitedBubb v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 9-Nov-2011
The appellant had sought housing assistance. She had been offered accomodation but refused it as unreasonable. The authority declined further assistance. She now appealed against the refusal of the county court judge to set aside the decision . .
CitedKing, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice CA 27-Mar-2012
In each case the prisoners challenged their transfer to cellular confinement or segregation within prison or YOI, saying that the transfers infringed their rights under Article 6, saying that domestic law, either in itself or in conjunction with . .
CitedHotak and Others v London Borough of Southwark and Another SC 13-May-2015
The court was asked as to the duty of local housing authorities towards homeless people who claim to be ‘vulnerable’, and therefore to have ‘a priority need’ for the provision of housing accommodation under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996. Those . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights, Administrative, Local Government

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.179047

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 characteristics of the occupier did have some relevance, for example in imposing a requirement for references.
Longmore, Lewison, Briggs LJJ
[2017] EWCA Civ 188, [2017] WLR(D) 222, [2017] PTSR 879
Bailii, WLRD
Housing Act 2004 61, Licensing and Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation and Other Houses (Miscellaneous Provisions) (England) Regulations 2006 3
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromNottingham City Council v Parr and Another SC 10-Oct-2018
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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 September 2021; Ref: scu.581297

Dayani v London Borough of Bromley: TCC 25 Nov 1999

LA Tenant liable for permissive waste

The local authority was tenant of properties which it sub-licensed to homeless persons for three years was liable for having allowed the properties to deteriorate. It was claimed that they were liable for permissive waste as tenants for a fixed period, even though the statute and cases were extremely old.
Held: Interpretation of statutes given relatively soon after the inception of a statute and relied upon over centuries should be set aside only with caution. After a very extensive review of ancient statute and case law, the court noted that a tenant for life and a tenant for years were liable in damages for permissive waste for about 600 years from 1267. A tenant for years can be liable for permissive waste.
Richard Havery QC HHJ
Gazette 25-Nov-1999, (1996) ORB 1077, [1999] EWHC Technology 186
Bailii
Statute of Marborough 1267, Statute of Gloucester 1278, Statute of Westminster 1285 c.14
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedHarnett v Maitland 1847
The court was asked whether a tenant for years was liable for permissive waste.
Held: ‘As to the question, whether the action for permissive waste lies against a tenant for years, all the authorities are collected in the notes to Greene v. . .
CitedYellowly v Gower CEC 1855
A tenant for years was liable for permissive waste: A doubt has been stated indeed in a note to 2 Saund. 252b, whether a tenant for years is liable for permissive waste . . .These doubts arise from three cases in the Common Pleas: Gibson v. Wells 1 . .
CitedHerne v Bembow 1813
The premises were demised by the plaintiff to the defendant by lease. It was an action on the case in the nature of waste.
Held: ‘Case for permissive waste does not lie against a tenant by lease, who has not covenanted to repair’. . .
CitedDavies v Davies 1888
A tenant for years was liable for permissive waste: ‘Actual waste, that is to say, waste committed by him, would of course render him liable to eviction; but it is said that that does not apply to a case of this kind – that a lessee for years is not . .
CitedCountess of Shrewsbury’s Case 1600
A tenant at will is not liable for permissive waste where confidence has not been reposed in him. . .
Cited21 E.1 Adam’s Case 1293
(Year Books) If the sheriff hold the inquest and return that the grange and bakehouse were burned by accident, and do not say whether the conflagration was caused by the default of the tenant or not, the sheriff will be again ordered to enquire . .
Cited29 E3.33 1355
(Year Books) In waste for a chamber demolished and sold Gower says that at the time of the making of the lease it was very weak and so it collapsed through a storm and we did not demolish it nor did it collapse by our fault. And this was held a good . .
Cited42 E.3.21 1368
(Year Books) The prior of the Hospital of St John brought a writ of waste against one J. and alleged that he had committed waste in certain tenements which he held for the term of his life by the lease of his predecessor, namely in respect of a . .
CitedJones v Hill CCP 1817
The lessor granted a lease and covenanted to cause the alterations and improvements then going on under the direction of J.M., and the lessee covenanted to repair the premises and to yield them up in as good plight and condition as they should be in . .
Cited12 H.4.5 1410
(Year Books) The abbot of Sherborne brought a writ of waste against two husbands and their wives and when the grand distress was returned one husband and wife defaulted and the other husband and wife appeared.
Skrene . . if I lease buildings . .
CitedGibson v Wells 1806
This was an action on the case in the nature of waste. The first count alleged that the defendant was a tenant for a certain term and had committed voluntary waste. It was alleged that the defendant was a tenant for a certain term and had committed . .
Cited7 H.6.38 1429
Waste was brought against one and waste was assigned in respect of a chamber because he had allowed it to fall down for lack of roofing and also in certain cottages, . . .
Newton . . .As for the chamber we tell you that it was unroofed at the . .
Cited11. H.6.1 1432
Waste brought against a tenant for term of years for the cutting down of one hundred oaks and allowing the wood to lie unenclosed so that animals have eaten the shoots of the said wood so that they have ceased to grow.
Danby It was not the . .
CitedGreene v Cole 1670
(Note) With regard to an action for waste: ‘But this action is now very seldom brought, and has given way to a much more expeditious and easy remedy by an action on the case in the nature of waste. The plaintiff derives the same benefit from it, as . .
Cited5 E.4 89 1465
A writ of waste was brought and declaration made that the waste had been committed in a messuage, namely in one hall and assigned the waste in a chamber etc. and in a kitchen and assigned the waste in allowing the kitchen to fall down because he did . .
CitedNewall v Donning 1633
If a lessee permit the walls to be in decay for default of daubing, by which timbers become rotten, an action of waste lies. Decision of Court of King’s Bench in banc on writ of error, and the first judgment affirmed accordingly. . .
Cited10 H.7.5a 1494
In the Common Bench a writ of waste was brought and the plaintiff assigned as waste allowing an earthwall to stand uncovered so that it was destroyed by rain-storms; and he also assigned as waste allowing another wall made of wood to decay and also . .
CitedWeymouth v Gilbert 1632
If a lessee allow a chamber to fall into disrepair through a defect of plastering, by which great timbers become rotten and the chamber becomes foul, there lies an action of waste. Decision of the Court of King’s Bench in banc on writ of error, . .
Cited10 H.7.2 1494
Waste brought by an abbot; and he counted how the defendant had committed waste in various things in lands leased to him by his predecessor for a term of years; and assigned as waste . . . the permitting of a certain house to fall . . .
Also . .
CitedDarcy v Askwith 1617
Limits to Tenant’s Powers as Devisee
‘It is generally true that the lessee has no power to change the nature of the thing demised; he cannot . . decay the pale of a park, for then it ceases to be a park, nor may he drive away the stock . . because it disherits and takes away the . .
Cited13. H.7.21 1498
In waste the plaintiff counted of the lease of a mill for term of years and assigned waste committed in the floodgates and other things belonging to the mill. And the defendant said that there had been an agreement out of court between the plaintiff . .
CitedAnon 1568
Meade, Serjeant, moved this case at the bar: A man made a lease for years by indenture of a messuage and divers lands, with this clause in it, s. that if it happen the lessee to do any waste in and upon the premises, it shall be lawful for the . .
Cited12. H.8. 1 1520
(Year Books) One N. brought an action of waste against J., suggesting that he had cut down certain trees etc. And the defendant pleaded that he had committed no waste. Subsequently at nisi prius in the county he gave in evidence that the plaintiff . .
CitedAnon 2 Mar 1 1554
It was held by the Chief Justice that the erasing of a new frame, which was never covered, is not waste. But it was agreed that if a house be ruinous for default of any covering at the time of the death of the lessor, and afterwards the tenant . .
CitedAnon 1564
Waste in a marsh was alleged, in that the lessee had allowed a sea wall adjoining the marsh to become ruinous, as a result of which the sea had caused damage to the land. Counsel submitted that the allegation was not good, because the overflowing of . .
CitedGriffith’s Case 1564
Walter Griffith assigned waste in that the lessee suffered the banks of the River Trent, which flowed through the said lands, to be unrepaired, whereby the water burst the banks and surrounded the lands by default of the lessee. It was held by all . .
CitedLord Advocate v Walker Trustees HL 1912
The 1707 Act preserved the traditional offices in Scotland. The respondent held the position of Usher of the White Rod, and claimed his fees from those granted honours by the English parliament.
Held: The Act was clear. The fact that had been . .
CitedHebbert v Purchas 1871
Lord Hatherley said: ‘It is quite true that neither contrary practice nor disuse can repeal the positive enactment of a statute, but contemporaneous and continuous usage is of the greatest efficacy in law in determining the true construction of . .
CitedThe Trustees of Clyde Navigation v Laird and Sons HL 1883
The court was asked whether the Clyde Navigation Consolidation Act 1858 required dues to be paid on logs which were chained together and floated down the River Clyde. The evidence was that these dues had been levied and paid without protest for a . .
CitedLord Castlemain v Lord Craven 1733
Both voluntary and permissive waste (suffering houses to go out of repair) were alleged against a tenant for life. The relief sought was an account and an injunction. In relation to the permissive waste, the court refused to order an account or an . .
CitedPowys v Blagrave 24-Mar-1854
Tenant for Life. Permissive Waste
Courts of Equity have no means of interfering in cases of permissive waste by a tenant for life of real property.
There is no implied trust to keep the property in repair imposed upon a tenant for life under a will; for, if there were, he . .
CitedRe Cartwright; Avis v Newman ChD 1889
Permissive Waste: Tenant for Life / Remainderman
A tenant for life is not liable in damages for permissive waste. ‘Since the Statutes of Marlbridge and of Gloucester there must have been hundreds of thousands of tenants for life who have died leaving their estates in a condition of great . .
CitedCampbell College, Belfast v Commissioner of Valuation for Northern Ireland HL 1964
The rule of contemporary exposition should be applied only in relation to very old statutes. . .
CitedBourne v Keane HL 1919
Gift for Masses not Void for Superstition
An Irish Roman Catholic testator, domiciled in England, bequeathed 200 pounds to Westminster Cathedral for masses, and 200 pounds and his residuary personal Estate to the Jesuit Fathers of Farm Street, again for masses. The next of kin contended . .
CitedHammond v Webb 1715
(Serjeant Salkeld in argument) The Statute of Marlborough is a penal law; and yet, because a remedial law, it has been interpreted by equity. That Act says firmarii non faciant vastum; and it has been resolved . . that this Act extended to waste . .
CitedWood v Gaynon 2-Mar-1761
The plaintiff sought a decree to compel a life tenant and her husband to put and keep the premises in repair, or the appointment of a receiver with directions to repair the premises. The plaintiff could not sue at law because a party who shared the . .
CitedLord Bernard’s Case 1716
The Lord Chancellor’s court granted an injunction restraining a tenant for life without impeachment of waste who had committed voluntary waste of the mansion-house from committing further waste and obliging him to rebuild the mansion-house and put . .
CitedBarnes v Dowling QBD 1881
A preliminary issue was tried as to whether the plaintiff had an estate or interest entitling him to maintain an action for waste, either voluntary or permissive, against the defendant, who was tenant for life or lives.
Held: On the basis that . .
Cited7 H.3 wast 141 1223
CS Attachment against a tenant in dower as to why she had assarted one hundred oak trees and a mill had been broken and drained and the mill-pond also. The tenant said that her late husband M. by the king’s order . .
Cited40 E.3. 15b 1366
In a writ it was found that he had committed waste in respect of willows to the value of etc. and it was asked of the inquest jury whether it seemed to them that this was waste and they said that they were growing within the view and the site of the . .
Cited8 E.2 wast. 111 1315
In waste where the waste was found of three oak-trees worth etc. and two hundred willow-trees the plaintiff asked for judgment in accordance with the verdict.
INGE, J. did not adjudge waste in such form that he recover the place wasted for the . .
Cited38 Ass.1 1364
In a nisi prius at Winchester there was a writ of waste and where the tenant had pleaded that he had committed no waste it was found that the tenant had committed waste before the acquisition of the writ to the damage of one hundred shillings but it . .
Cited34 E.3 1360
Waste of a messuage. The tenant pleads ‘no waste committed’ and it was found that they were ruinous for lack of roofing within the term but that the buildings were still standing; notwithstanding this it was adjudged waste. . .
Cited17 E.2 wast 119 1324
Waste: the inquest says in respect of one building that he was said to have wasted that at the time the tenements were leased there was no building there but that the lessee had built it and then it was demolished and it was adjudged waste. In . .
Cited4 E.3. wast 22 1330
Waste alleging that he held for a term of years by his lease
Pole. No waste committed etc.
The inquest found that he had committed waste in a bakehouse and a rapine and in a mill to the damage of one mark and that he had felled an ash-tree . .
Cited29 E.3.33 1355
In waste for a chamber demolished and sold Gower says that at the time of the making of the lease it was very weak and so it collapsed through a storm and we did not demolish it nor did it collapse by our fault. And this was held a good response. . .
Cited17 E.3. 65 1343
Two brothers, J. Gray and his brother W., brought a writ of waste against a woman who held in dower of their inheritance and alleged by their count that this was because the lands were partible and counted of waste committed in buildings, lands and . .
Cited26 E.3. 76 [recte 26 E.3. 22] 1352
In a writ of waste brought against a tenant in dower the count was that she held in dower of his inheritance and that she had committed waste in the manor of W. and he assigned the waste.
Birton. He does not show how we hold of his . .
Cited17 E.3. 7 1343
John de Hull and Maud his wife brought a writ of waste against H. Hadenham and assigned the waste in buildings, namely the knocking down of a hall, chamber, cowshed and grange, and in lands in the digging for ironstone and coal, and in gardens and . .
Cited20 E.3. 1346
Waste assigned in a building and in land dug with pits, namely one acre, and in clay carried off, and in timber cut down, namely oaks and ashes etc. and the defendant pleaded no waste committed and by the nis iprius it was found that the building . .
Cited18 E.3.15 (recte 14) 1344
John Stapleton brought a writ of waste in three villages where it was pleaded that one place which was called a village was a hamlet of one of the other villages named in the writ and they were at issue on this in relation to the whole writ. And by . .
Cited19 E.3. 1345
Waste: where it was found by an inquest where the party pleaded that no waste had been committed that in respect of a kitchen that was burned by a woman who was a stranger without the knowledge of the defendant because they lived elsewhere and to . .
Cited41 E.3. 1367
Waste against one alleging that he had felled certain oak trees growing in a wood and also hazels, thorns and willows only in ten acres of land adjoining the wood. He had committed waste by cutting down all the hazels, worth twelve pence each, and . .
Cited40 E.3. 35 [recte 40 E.3. 25] 1366
In a writ of waste the plaintiff counted that he had committed waste in respect of hazels and oak trees. And in respect of all except the hazels Belknap pleaded no waste committed and in respect of them he said that they were growing in a park under . .
Cited40 Ass. p. 22 1366
It was presented in King’s Bench that John P. who held the manor of E. and H. of the king’s lease had committed waste in the tenements which he had in wardship by reason of the nonage of John the son and heir of John Darcy knight, namely by knocking . .
Cited42 E.3. 21 1368
The prior of the Hospital of St John brought a writ of waste against one J and alleged that he had committed waste in certain tenements which he held for the term of his life by the lease of his predecessor, namely in respect of a chamber, a . .
Cited46 E.3. 17 1372
Waste brought by a man and alleging that the tenant held by his lease for the term of his life and the tenant came and showed a deed by which the plaintiff and four others had leased the tenements to him for the term of his life, reserving the . .
Cited42.E.3. 6b 1368
Waste brought against a man and it was alleged that he had demolished buildings and sold them and that he had cut down the underwood each year, so that it could not grow without being sold and also that he had razed an oven and sold it in the . .
Cited43 E.3. 6 1369
A writ of waste was brought and it was alleged that he had committed waste in lands that he held for the term of life and it was assigned that he had committed waste in respect of a grange.
Cavendish. The waste that was committed in the grange . .
Cited44 E.3.21 1370
Waste brought against John Exter by the abbot of Waltham, alleging that he had committed waste in a wood to the value of etc. and in a grange to the value of etc. and in certain cottages etc.
Cavendish. As to the wood, no waste committed, ready . .
Cited44 E.3.44 1370
A man brought a writ of waste against a woman and supposed by his writ that she had committed waste in respect of a wall and one hundred apple trees and had cut down one hundred oaks and a grange.
Kirkton. As to the wall we ask judgment if this . .
Cited49 E.3.2 (recte 49 E.3.1) 1375
A man brought a writ of waste against Thomas Grey of York and alleged that he held for a life term by his lease and assigned waste in respect of a house namely in a grange, a hall and a cottage.
Fulthorpe. As for the hall and the grange we tell . .
CitedDove v Banhams Patent Locks 1983
The defendants installed a security gate. The plaintiff, a subsequent purchaser of the property claimed damages when the property was burgled and a defect in the security gate was revealed.
Held: The defendant owed a duty of to the subsequent . .
Cited5 R.2 wast 97 1382
Waste where the count was that he had committed waste in ponds which he held in wardship, namely one pond which he had drained and the other in which he destroyed the fish.
Burgh. The writ does not state whether we are guardian de facto or de . .
Cited9 H.6. 10 1431
In a writ of waste
Fulthorpe. Judgment of the count. He has alleged waste in oaks and thorns and thorns cannot be considered waste.
Goderede. What do you say in respect of the oaks?
Fulthorpe. That goes for all.
PASTON, J. That is . .
Cited11 H.4.32 1409
Thomas Earl of Arundel brought a writ of waste alleging that his ancestor had leased a manor to the defendant for a term of years and specified waste in a hall, a kitchen, a stable and certain oak trees.
Norton (for the defendant) says that the . .
Cited7 H.6. 38 1429
Waste was brought against one and waste was assigned in respect of a chamber because he had allowed it to fall down for lack of roofing and also in certain cottages, certain oak trees and certain ash-trees, certain pear-trees and certain apple-trees . .
Cited12 H.4. 5 1410
The abbot of Sherborne brought a writ of waste against two husbands and their wives and when the grand distress was returned one husband and wife defaulted and the other husband and wife appeared.
Skrene. Against those who have defaulted we ask . .
Cited11 H.6.1 1432
Waste brought against a tenant for term of years for the cutting down of one hundred oaks and in allowing the wood to lie unenclosed so that animals have eaten the shoots of the said wood so that they have ceased to grow.
Danby. It was not the . .
Cited22 H.6. 12a 1443
In a writ of waste the plaintiff made a declaration through Danby and assigned as waste the felling of one hundred oaks and also the waste made to the stumps of these same oaks.
Bingham. It appears by the count that the waste is assigned in . .
Cited18 H. 6. 33b 1440
A very long scire facias case mainly concerned with other matters. Viner is picking up a passing reference in an argument by Markham that runs as follows: Markham. In a writ of waste brought against me I may well plead that at the time the lease was . .
Cited20 H.6. 1 1441
The plaintiff counted that the defendant had committed waste in certain land that he held by curtesy of his inheritance and assigned as waste allowing a sewer within the land not to be maintained so that so much meadow being part of the land is . .
Cited23 H.6. 24/22 H. 6 24 1443
In a writ of waste
Danby. Judgment of the writ for the writ supposes the waste to have been committed in terris, domibus, boscis et pratis and he has counted among other things of waste committed in knocking down a fence that surrounds a house . .
Cited22 H.6. 18 1443
In a writ of waste the waste assigned was in respect of a house, twenty oaks, forty cart-loads of clay.
Markham. Clay cannot be called waste.
To which it was said by the Court that it is waste in as much as the soil is made poorer by removal . .
Cited5 E. 4. 100 1465
A writ of waste was brought alleging that waste had been committed in respect of a building etc. and also in respect of wood, namely certain trees. And in the count in respect of the trees he counted that the defendant cut down the trees and sold . .
Cited12 H.8. 1 1520
One N. brought an action of waste against J., suggesting that he had cut down certain trees etc. And the defendant pleaded that he had committed no waste. Subsequently at nisi prius in the county he gave in evidence that the plaintiff had leased him . .
Cited5 E.4. 89 1465
A writ of waste was brought and declaration made that the waste had been committed in a messuage, namely in one hall and assigned the waste in a chamber etc. and in a kitchen and assigned the waste in allowing the kitchen to fall down because he did . .
Cited13 H.7. 21 1498
In waste the plaintiff counted of the lease of a mill for term of years and assigned waste committed in the floodgates and other things belonging to the mill. And the defendant said that there had been an agreement out of court between the plaintiff . .
Cited9 E.4. 35 1469
Report of an action of right for land which then half way through seems to become a report of a quite different action of trespass or of nuisance in which there is one relevant speech by NEEDHAM, J. If a man erect a building to the nuisance of my . .
Cited10 H.7.2 1494
Waste brought by an abbot; and he counted how the defendant had committed waste in various things in lands leased to him by his predecessor for a term of years; and assigned as waste . . . the permitting of a certain house to fall . . .
Also . .
Cited12 E.4. 1 1472
In waste brought by two on a lease for life. One of the plaintiffs was summoned and severed and the other sued on and alleged waste in respect of various matters etc. and also in cutting down willow trees. The waste was found and the damages . .
Cited10 H.7. 5a 1494
In the Common Bench a writ of waste was brought and the plaintiff assigned as waste allowing an earthwall to stand uncovered so that it was destroyed by rain-storms; and he also assigned as waste allowing another wall made of wood to decay and also . .
Cited2 H.7. 24 [recte 2 H.7. 14] 1487
In a writ of waste brought against a tenant for a life term who pleaded an order of the plaintiff and that he ordered him to dig for gravel. On which there was a demurrer for judgment as to whether or not the order was good.
Keble. It seems that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 September 2021; Ref: scu.79848

Regina v South Hams District Council, ex parte Gibb, Regina v Gloucestershire County Council, ex parte Davis Etc: QBD 15 Nov 1993

The term ‘Gypsy’ is to be interpreted to include persons who have a nomadic life but more than just habit.
Times 15-Nov-1993
Caravan Sites Act 1968
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromRegina v South Hams District Council, ex parte Gibb and Another, Regina v Gloucester Cc, ex parte Davies CA 8-Jun-1994
The meaning of ‘Gypsy’ under the Act requires some element of travelling, and should include that this was associated with the means of earning a living. In applying the statutory definition of gypsies the actual words used are to be used, taking . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.88082

Smith v Marrable: 1843

Premises were let furnished with the tenant paying a weekly rent of eight guineas. The tenant complained that the premises were unfit, being infested with bugs, and left. The landlord sued for his rent.
Held: As an exception to the general rule against implied terms for repair in tenancy contracts, there is an implied covenant of fitness for habitation in a letting of a furnished house. Also a contract of tenancy may be repudiated by a breach of such a condition, and it is not to be held against the tenant that he has endured the breach for longer than he needed to.
Lord Abinger CB said: ‘in point of law every house must be taken to be let upon the implied condition that there was nothing about it so noxious as to render it uninhabitable.’ and ‘I entertain no doubt whatever on the subject, and think the defendant was fully justified in leaving these premises as he did: indeed, I only wonder that he remained so long, and gave the landlord so much opportunity of remedying the evil.’
Parke B said that premises were unfit for human habitation: ‘if the demised premises are incumbered with a nuisance of so serious a nature that no person can reasonably be expected to live in them.’ and ‘These authorities appear to me fully to warrant the position, that if the demised premises are incumbered with a nuisance of so serious a nature that no person can reasonably be expected to live in them, the tenant is at liberty to throw them up.’
Parke B, Lord Abinger CB
(1843) 11 MandW 5, (1843) Car and M 479, (1843) LJ Ex 223, (1843) 7 Jur 70, (1843) ER 693
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBaker v Holtpzapffel 1811
A tenant was obliged to continue paying rent even though the house he rented was burned down through no fault of the landlord. . .
CitedEdwards v Etherington 1825
The defendant had been the tenant of a house from year to year. He left without notice, saying that the walls were dilapidated to the point of being unsafe. On a Nisi Prius, these facts were held to be an answer to an action by the landlord for use . .
CitedCollins v Barrow 1831
The defendant held property under a three-year lease with a covenant to keep the premises in tenantable repair. He abandoned it without notice after nine months. He now defended an action for the subsequent rent, saying that the house had become . .
CitedArden v Pullen ExcC 1842
The tenancy contained a repairing covenant but the tenant left the house saying that subsidence had caused it to become flooded.
Held: He remained liable to pay the rent.
Lord Abinger CB said: ‘I am of opinion that, unless there has been . .

Cited by:
CitedHussain v Mehlman CC 5-Mar-1992
(County Court) The defendant landlord granted the plaintiff a three year assured shorthold tenancy. He now appealed a finding that he was in breach of an implied covenant to maintain the space heating, and otherwise. The tenant had returned the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 August 2021; Ref: scu.222033

Herefordshire Council v AB: FC 1 Feb 2018

Keehan J
[2018] 2 FLR 784, [2018] EWFC 10
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedWilliams and Another v London Borough of Hackney SC 18-Jul-2018
On arrest for shoplifting a 12 year old said he had been doing so to get food, and that he had been hit with a belt by his father. Investigation revealed the home to be dangerous, and all eight children were removed to the care of the LA. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.606353

Woolfe, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Islington: Admn 15 Jul 2016

The claimant sought judicial review against Islington under three discrete heads of claim that (1) an aspect of Islington’s scheme is unlawful in that it prevents applicants to whom reasonable preference must be given, but who have fewer than 120 points, from bidding at all for available properties; (2) additionally or alternatively, that points threshold for bidding is unlawful, being in breach of section 11 of the Children Act 2004; and (3) in relation to herself, Islington in any event misapplied their own policy and failed to award her the 90 ‘New Generation’ points to which she says she is entitled under Islington’s own policy and scheme.
Holman J
[2016] EWHC 1907 (Admin)
Bailii
Children Act 2004 11
England and Wales

Updated: 24 July 2021; Ref: scu.567657

EA and others (Public Funds: Housing Association Housing) Nigeria: AIT 25 Nov 2008

AIT Where housing is provided by a housing association it will amount to public funds within the meaning of para 6 of HC 395 if the housing association is acting as the delegate of a local authority in respect of the latter’s housing obligations.
[2008] UKAIT 00084
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 17 June 2021; Ref: scu.278544

Regina v Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council Ex Parte Grillo: CA 13 Jun 1995

There was no general onus on Local Authorities to give reasons for their decisions in the absence of any explicit or particular duty.
Independent 13-Jun-1995, (1995) 28 HLR 94
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedHasan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 25-Nov-2008
hasan_sstiCA2008
The claimant appealed refusal of leave to bring judicial review of decisions to sell arms to the Israeli state. He lived in Palestine and said that Israel had destroyed his farm, and that licences broke the criteria under the 2002 Act. He said that . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 June 2021; Ref: scu.87057

Cadogan Estates Ltd v McMahon: CA 9 Jun 1999

A provision in a tenancy agreement that the tenancy would cease upon the bankruptcy of the tenant, continued and became part of the terms of a statutory tenancy following the contractual one. The provision was not inconsistent with the idea of the statutory tenancy, and the term was implied into the statutory tenancy.
Stuart-Smith and Laws L.JJ. and Jonathan Parker J.)
Times 01-Jun-1999, Gazette 03-Jun-1999, Gazette 09-Jun-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1470, [1999] 1 WLR 1689, [1999] L and TR 481
Bailii
Rent Act 1977 98(1)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromCadogan Estates Limited v McMahon HL 26-Oct-2000
When a tenancy was terminated and was followed by a statutory tenancy, a term in the contractual tenancy that the tenancy should be forfeit on the tenant’s bankruptcy was continued in and inherited by the statutory tenancy. Though perhaps in . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 June 2021; Ref: scu.78822

Kelsey Housing Association Ltd v King and Another: CA 8 Aug 1995

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.
Aldous LJ, Butler-Sloss LJ
Times 08-Aug-1995, Ind Summary 28-Aug-1995, (1995) 28 HLR 270
Housing Act 1986 8(1)(b)
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedKnowsley Housing Trust v Revell; Helena Housing Ltd v Curtis CA 9-Apr-2003
The local authority landlord commenced proceedings for possession, but then transferred the properties to a registered social landlord. The tenants objected that the new landlords could not continue the proceedings.
Held: The transfer moved . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2021; Ref: scu.82720

Regina v Bristol County Court Ex Parte Bradic: CA 1 Sep 1995

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.
Roch LJ
Gazette 15-Sep-1995, Independent 01-Sep-1995, (1995) HLR 584
Housing Act 1985 59(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedNoble v South Herefordshire District Council CA 1983
The argument (that the word ’emergency’ was used in a wider sense than emergencies confined to emergencies arising from disaster) had no force in this case because in the phrase ‘any emergency such as flood, fire or any other disaster’ the words ‘or . .

Cited by:
CitedHiggs v Brighton and Hove City Council CA 30-Jun-2003
The applicant lived in a caravan. It disappeared without trace, and he claimed emergency housing under the section. Was housing required as a result of an emergency flood fire or disaster?
Held: There was in fact no explanation available for . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2021; Ref: scu.86209

Spath Holme Ltd v Greater Manchester and Lancashire Rent Assessment Committee: CA 9 Aug 1995

The rent assessment committee had rejected market rent comparables as an indicator of market rent for the subject premises, because, inter alia, they were not satisfied of the actual absence of scarcity, and thus found that the landlord had not demonstrated the unsoundness of registered fair rent comparables.
Held: The decision was upheld. A fair rent is a market rent ignoring personal circumstances and scarcity. Comparables were wrongly rejected where discounting for scarcity and security possible. Fair rents were based on market rents, less scarcity and other disregards, and were not reasonable rents in any other sense including their impact on tenants. The Court gave general guidance to rent assessment committees making it clear that they were expected to follow market rent comparables as the best evidence of the starting point for fair rents, to give clear reasons and to explain their determinations with arithmetic if necessary. A ‘fair rent’ under the 1977 Act is the same as a ‘market rent’ under the 1988 Act save for the assumption of no scarcity and allowing for the statutory’disregards’, and that, in assessing a fair rent, regard should be had to market rent comparables if any: ‘… the fair rent to be determined is a market rent less the disregards and discounted for scarcity. Thus, … if there is no scarcity and no disregards then the rents should be the same whether the tenancy is a regulated tenancy or an assured tenancy.’
A fair rent is an adjusted market rent and market rent comparables are relevant to the assessment of a fair rent: ‘In this case there are a number of flats in the same block let on assured tenancies at, by definition, open market rents which are virtually identical to those for which a fair rent is to be determined. In my judgment if, in those circumstances, a Rent Assessment Committee wishes to exercise its discretion to adopt some other comparable or method of assessment it will be failing in its duty to give reasons if it does not explain why.
In this case the third reason given by the Rent Assessment Committee as recorded by the judge was that the registered rent comparables had not been demonstrated to be unsound. That is not, of course, a reason for rejecting the assured tenancy comparables. It is not for the court to say in advance what would be a good reason for doing so but if such a reason involves ‘working through’ such comparables so be it: that consequence is no ground for rejecting the validity of its cause. But it should also be noted that the registered rent comparables are not in their nature any more or less sound than the open market rent with or without discount. Any registered rent has built into at least two variables namely the open market rent and the discount for scarcity. Each should have been considered at the time of the original determination. The assessment of the soundness of that registered rent for use as a comparable would require each of those variables to be reconsidered at the time of their possible use as a comparable.
In this connection it was also objected that if the Rent Assessment Committee were required to give detailed reasons that might necessitate giving detailed arithmetical workings or quantifying the degree of scarcity involved contrary to statements in Guppy’s Property v. Knott No 1 … and Metropolitan Properties v. Laufer … But those statements were made in relation to the facts of those cases. It does not follow that there will not be cases in which the duty to give reasons will require such workings or quantification to be afforded.’
Glidewell LJ. and Sir John May
Ind Summary 28-Aug-1995, Times 09-Aug-1995, (1995) 28 HLR 107, [1995] 2 EGLR 80
Rent Act 1977 70(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromSpath Home Ltd v Greater Manchester and Lancashire Rent Assessment Committee QBD 13-Jul-1994
The rent assessment committee had rejected proposed market rent comparables as an indicator of market rent for the premises, because they were not satisfied of the actual absence of scarcity. The landlord had not demonstrated the unsoundness of . .

Cited by:
Appealed toSpath Home Ltd v Greater Manchester and Lancashire Rent Assessment Committee QBD 13-Jul-1994
The rent assessment committee had rejected proposed market rent comparables as an indicator of market rent for the premises, because they were not satisfied of the actual absence of scarcity. The landlord had not demonstrated the unsoundness of . .
CitedSheppard-Capurro, Regina (on the Application of) v London Rent Assessment Panel Admn 27-Jul-2005
. .
CitedCurtis v Chairman of London Rent Assessment Committee; Huntingford and Packford CA 9-Oct-1997
The claimant sought to appeal the quashing of determinations of a fair rent for two properties. . .
See alsoSpath Holme Ltd v Chairman of the Greater Manchester and Lancashire Rent Assessment Committee (No2); Curtis v Similar QBD 2-Jan-1998
A Bill of costs could be presented even though counsel’s fee had not yet been agreed; an extension of time was properly granted. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2021; Ref: scu.89447

Drake v Whipp: CA 30 Nov 1995

The parties, an unmarried cohabiting couple, disputed their respective shares in a property held in the man’s sole name. Both had made direct contributions both to the purchase of a barn and to its expensive conversion into a home. The plaintiff appealed against a finding that she had only a 14.9% interest on a resulting trust, in the house she and the defendant had occupied together. The property had been purchased for andpound;61,000 of which she had contributed andpound;24,000, with later additional contributions to conversion works. She complained that working on a resulting trust, the costs of acquisition were given undue emphasis.
Held: A beneficial interest in a family home could be presumed from the intention of the parties and their acting in detriment. There was a constructive trust. There was undisputed evidence that she was to have an interest in the property, and she had acted to further that intention and to her detriment. The appeal was allowed, and her interest set at one third. ‘it is not easy to reconcile every judicial utterance in this well-travelled area of the law. A potent source of confusion, to my mind, has been suggestions that it matters not whether the terminology used is that of the constructive trust, to which the intention, actual or imputed, of the parties is crucial, or that of the resulting trust which operates on a presumed intention of the contributing party in the absence of rebutting evidence of actual intention.’
Peter Gibson LJ, Lord Justice Hirst and Mr Justice Forbes
Times 19-Dec-1995, [1996] 2 FCR 296, [1995] EWCA Civ 25, (1996) 28 HLR 531, [1996] CLY 5780
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedLloyds Bank plc v Rosset HL 29-Mar-1990
The house had been bought during the marriage but in the husband’s sole name. The plaintiff’s charge secured the husband’s overdraft. The bank issued possession proceedings. Mr Rosset had left, but Mrs Rosset claimed, as against the bank an interest . .
CitedDyer v Dyer 27-Nov-1988
Where property is purchased by one person in the name of another there is a presumption that a resulting trust is created: ‘The clear result of all the cases, without a single exception is that the trust of a legal estate, whether freehold, copyhold . .

Cited by:
CitedOxley v Hiscock CA 6-May-2004
oxley_hiscockCA2004
The parties were not married, but had brought together their resources to purchase a home in the name of one of them. Nothing had been said about the respective shares on which the property was to be held.
Held: The shares were to be assessed . .
CitedStack v Dowden HL 25-Apr-2007
The parties had cohabited for a long time, in a home bought by Ms Dowden. After the breakdown of the relationship, Mr Stack claimed an equal interest in the second family home, which they had bought in joint names. The House was asked whether, when . .
CitedJones v Kernott SC 9-Nov-2011
Unmarried Couple – Equal division displaced
The parties were unmarried but had lived together. They now disputed the shares in which they had held the family home. It had been bought in joint names, but after Mr Kernott (K) left in 1993, Ms Jones (J) had made all payments on the house. She . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 02 June 2021; Ref: scu.80130

Oakley v Birmingham City Council: QBD 8 Jan 1999

The justices had concluded that the layout itself of premises was so unhygienic as to be ‘in a state prejudicial to health.’ The small toilets without a wash basin and next to the kitchen created a risk of cross-infection, and were a statutory nuisance.
Times 08-Jan-1999
Environmental Protection Act 1990 79
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromBirmingham City Council v Oakley HL 29-Nov-2000
When considering if premises fell within the section, and were ‘in such a state as to be prejudicial to health’, the court must consider some feature of the premises which was in itself prejudicial. An arrangement of rooms which was unsatisfactory . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 May 2021; Ref: scu.84406

Laimond Properties Limited v Al-Shakarchi: CA 10 Feb 1998

If ‘suitable alternative accommodation’ was offered in exchange for a protected tenancy, the court need look only for some security for the tenant, not that he should receive equal protection. Where the landlord persuades the Rent Act protected tenants to surrender their old tenancy before taking a new tenancy, the lessees would not have been Rent Act tenants ‘immediately before the tenancy was granted’, but ‘Sub-paragraph (b) of section 34(1) is clearly designed to shield the tenant who had security of tenure under the 1977 Act and who has been persuaded by his landlord to enter into a new tenancy after January 15, 1989 so as to prevent him from losing the 1977 Act protection. It is designed to defeat an argument that the tenant has lost his 1977 Act protection because he has voluntarily surrendered the tenancy entered into prior to January 15, 1989 which attracted the provisions of the 1977 Act in exchange for a new tenancy which, being post January 15, 1989, did not qualify for that security. Section 34(1)(b) has in my opinion no application in a case such as the present where the landlord has gone to the court and obtained an order for possession.’
. . And ‘I can see no reason why section 34(1)(b) ought to be read subject to the suggested limitation; a view apparently shared by the judge in the case of Goringe v Twinsactra Ltd decided on April 20 1994, reported in the Legal Action Group Bulletin for June 1994 at 11.’
Roche LJ Sir Brian Neill
Gazette 26-Feb-1998, Times 23-Feb-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 197, (1998) 30 HLR 1099
Housing Act 1988 1
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedSecretarial and Nominee Co Ltd v Thomas and others CA 29-Jul-2005
The court was asked about transitional arrangements for Rent Act tenants after the 1988 Act: ‘If A, a Rent Act tenant, takes a new tenancy agreement after the commencement of the 1988 Act jointly with B, does B thereafter partake in the ongoing . .
See AlsoLaimond Properties Limited and Christina Raeuchle CA 18-Aug-1999
Application for leave to appeal granted. . .
See AlsoLaimond Properties Ltd v Raeuchle CA 24-Jan-2000
The landlord acquired the freehold of a small block of flats in 1993. The defendant had been a tenant protected under the Rent Acts since 1976. He also made use of a neighburing empty room without paying rent. His rent was nearly all paid through . .
AppliedArogol Company Ltd v Rajah CA 21-Mar-2001
Defendant’s appeal from an order granting the claimant a possession order in respect of a ground floor flat. The basic question in the proceedings was whether the defendant had a tenancy protected under the Rent Act 1977.
Held: The appeal . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 May 2021; Ref: scu.143675

Regina v London Borough of Camden ex parte Aranda: CA 21 Mar 1997

The applicant and her husband surrendered their tenancy of a house in Camden and moved to Colombia, where they obtained accommodation. On arrival in Colombia, the applicant was deserted by her husband. With no prospect of employment in Colombia, and no entitlement to social security benefits, she returned to Camden and applied for housing. Camden now appealed against decision that the applicant was not intentionally homeless.
Held: The causal connection between her deliberately giving up the accommodation in Camden, and her homelessness after leaving the accommodation in Colombia, had been broken by her husband’s desertion.
[1997] EWCA Civ 1309, (1997) 30 HLR 76
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedHaile 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.141705

Cavendish Square Investments Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Moule: Admn 31 Jan 2012

Appeal against a decision of the Rent Assessment Committee of the London Rent Assessment Panel whereby the Rent Assessment Committee decided that the fair rent which Mr Moule, the respondent to this appeal decided that the fair rent is andpound;5654.50 per annum.
Timothy Dutton QC
[2012] EWHC 1839 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.463078

Regina v Wandsworth London Borough Council Ex Parte Wingrove; Regina v Same Ex Parte Mansoor: CA 7 Jun 1996

Accommodation provided by a local authority need not be permanent in order to satisfy the statutory requirement to assist somebody in need of assistance for homelessness. The full duty might be discharged by securing the offer of an assured shorthold tenancy of suitable premises
Sir Thomas Bingham MR
Times 07-Jun-1996, [1997] QB 953
Housing Act 1985 65(2)
England and Wales
Citing:
AppliedRegina 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 . .

Cited by:
CitedGriffiths v St Helens Council CA 7-Mar-2006
The applicant had been agreed to be homeless with priority need, and had been provided with an assured shorthold tenancy.
Held: The Legislation now allowed broadly three classes of accomodation as suitable: (1) accommodation owned by the local . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 April 2021; Ref: scu.88254

Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society Plc v Norgan: CA 5 Dec 1995

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.
Evans, Waite LJJ, Sir John May
Gazette 17-Jan-1996, Independent 14-Dec-1995, Times 08-Dec-1995, [1995] EWCA Civ 11, [1996] 1 WLR 343, [1996] 1 All ER 449, (1996) 28 HLR 443
Bailii
Administration of Justice Act 1970 30, Administration of Justice Act 1973 8
England and Wales

Updated: 10 April 2021; Ref: scu.79006

The Mortgage Corporation Ltd v Ubah: CA 21 Mar 1996

The respondent mortgagee had obtained an order for possession against the mortgagor freeholder, referred to in the judgment as ‘the Chief’, who had, prior to the mortgage, granted a tenancy to the appellant.
Held: The landlord’s retention of a right to use the kitchen made the tenancy a restricted tenancy even though no use was possible by the landlord under the contract in that situation.
CS Millett LJ: ‘The appellant’s evidence was that in 1987, that is before the mortgage was granted to the respondents, the appellant arranged for work to be carried out on the flat. The Chief later agreed with him that he would pay andpound;13,873 towards the cost of those repairs and in the words of the appellant ‘the Chief told me to set my rent against what he owed me’. That agreement was effective between the parties, but it did not confirm upon the appellant an interest in land capable of binding successors in title to the Chief whether with or without notice of the arrangements unless the right the right of deduction which was given to the appellant fell within one of the two established rights of deduction which are capable of binding successors in title’. And
‘As against the Chief in my opinion the appellant may well be entitled to deduct the amount which the Chief owes him from payments of rent which are due to the Chief. But the money judgment below is entirely in respect of rent to due the respondents after the date that they had notified the appellant that they had taken possession. The appellant has no right of set-off capable of binding successors in title such as the respondents. It is, of course, settled law that an interest which is not capable of binding successors in title cannot be an over-riding interest within section 70(1)(g) of the Land Registration Act 1925.’
Millett LJ
Gazette 03-Apr-1996, Times 21-Mar-1996, [1996] 73 P and CR at 500
Rent Act 1977 21
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBritish Anzani (Felixstowe) Ltd v International Marine Management (UK) Ltd ChD 19-Dec-1978
Money expended by a tenant on discharging his landlord’s covenants will in appropriate circumstances operate as a partial or a complete discharge so as to furnish a defence at law to a claim for unpaid rent; and where the tenant has suffered damage . .
CitedLee-Parker v Izzett (1) ChD 1971
Money expended by a tenant on discharging his landlord’s covenants will in appropriate circumstances operate as a partial or a complete discharge so as to furnish a defence of set-off at law to a claim for unpaid rent. Justice Goff discussed the . .

Cited by:
CitedEdlington Properties Limited v J H Fenner and Co Limited CA 22-Mar-2006
The landlord had assigned the reversion of the lease. There was an outstanding dispute with the tenant defendant who owed arrears of rent, but sought to set these off against a claim for damages for the landlord’s failure to construct the factory in . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 April 2021; Ref: scu.89837

Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Castelli; Regina v Same Ex Parte Tristan Garcia: CA 23 Feb 1996

A Local Authority has a duty to house European Union migrants even without leave to stay as long as they are looking for work. EU nationals who were properly entering the UK were owed the Housing Act duties until they were told that they were overstaying.
Independent 23-Feb-1996, Gazette 20-Mar-1996, Times 27-Feb-1996, (1996) 28 HLR 616
Housing Act 1985 63 65
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Castelli; Regina v Same Ex Parte Tristan-Garcia QBD 11-Oct-1995
An applicant’s immigration status was proper factor in assessing housing need. A Local Authority may look to whether an EC national has right of residence before assessing its own duty to house the applicant. . .

Cited by:
Appealed toRegina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Castelli; Regina v Same Ex Parte Tristan-Garcia QBD 11-Oct-1995
An applicant’s immigration status was proper factor in assessing housing need. A Local Authority may look to whether an EC national has right of residence before assessing its own duty to house the applicant. . .
CitedLondon Borough of Barnet v Ismail and Another CA 6-Apr-2006
The court considered the entitlement to housing support of nationals of other EEA states receiving Income Support here despite their being still subject to immigration control.
Held: Such EEA nationals were eligible for housing benefit. The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 April 2021; Ref: scu.88300

Marath and Another v MacGillivray: CA 5 Feb 1996

A landlord’s notice to the effect that ‘3 month’s rent due’ was a sufficiently precise demand to allow the tenant to know the nature of his default, and the notice was valid. the relevant notice said: ‘Signed: RM If signed by agent, name and address of agent: Acting Agent RM’ with the address. This notice had been served as an exhibit to an affidavit by the agent.
Held: A notice served for the purposes of section 20 of the 1988 Act (notwithstanding that it was not a valid notice for the purposes of section 20 itself, because it was served after rather than before the ‘assured tenancy’ was entered into) provided sufficient notice for the purposes of section 48(1).
Sir Iain Glidewell said: ‘I see the strength in the argument that if it be proved that the landlord, or his solicitors acting on his behalf, had quite deliberately ensured that payment which otherwise would have come from a housing authority was delayed until after the date of the hearing, in order to enable the landlord to prove that more than three months’ rent was in fact unpaid, a court would be slow to base a judgment upon more than three months’ rent being unpaid. Precisely how it would go about reflecting that unwillingness to give judgment when it is required by statute to do so, I have not considered.’
Sir Iain Glidewell
Times 05-Feb-1996, [1996] 28 HLR 484
Housing Act 1988 8 20, Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 48(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRogan v Woodfield Building Services Ltd CA 10-Aug-1994
The duty placed on a Landlord by the section is to give to the tenant a notice of an address for service for the landlord in writing. Stuart Smith LJ said: ‘what the section requires is that the tenant is told, so that he knows, the landlord’s name . .

Cited by:
CitedDrew-Morgan v Hamid-Zadeh CA 13-May-1999
The claimant landlord had sought to assert that the let was an assured shorthold tenancy. On a rehearing, the tenant said no notice had been served under section 20. The landlord also now asserted non-payment of rent.
Held: A notice which was . .
CitedLeeds v London Borough of Islington Admn 29-Jan-1998
. .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 April 2021; Ref: scu.83393

Harrow London Borough Council v Johnstone: CA 31 Mar 1995

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.
Times 31-Mar-1995
England and Wales
Citing:
Appealed toLondon Borough of Harrow v Johnstone HL 13-Mar-1997
A possession action was lawful against a remaining joint tenant after a notice to terminate the tenancy had been given by the other tenant. An order against interference with possession of property did not extend to matters of the duration of the . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromLondon Borough of Harrow v Johnstone HL 13-Mar-1997
A possession action was lawful against a remaining joint tenant after a notice to terminate the tenancy had been given by the other tenant. An order against interference with possession of property did not extend to matters of the duration of the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 April 2021; Ref: scu.81268

Panayi and Pyrkos v Roberts: CA 1993

A shorthold tenancy notice was issued before the tenancy began, but it gave the wrong date for termination.
Held: The prescribed form required the correct termination date. A notice with a wrong date is not substantially the same as one with a correct date. The tenancy was therefore not an assured shorthold tenancy, and the section 20 notice was ineffective to terminate the tenancy. ‘There is a statutory pre-condition that a notice should have been served in the prescribed form. The prescribed form requires for completion a specification of the date on which the tenancy in respect of which a notice is served both commences and ends. The narrow issue is whether a notice which gives a wrong date (here a termination) is ‘substantially to the same effect’ as one which gives the correct date. Authority and an evident error apart, I find it difficult to say that it was. By ‘evident error’ I mean an error which would have been evident to a person with the ordinary qualities of the addressee. I would exclude a quality of obtuseness as being extraordinary. The writing of ‘1793’ for ‘1993’ would be an evident error. The writing in this case of ‘May’ rather than ‘November’ in my judgment would be a perplexity rather than an evident error to an ordinary recipient proposing and taking a tenancy of [and then the name of the property is given] …’ and ‘A notice with an incorrect date is not substantially to the same effect as a notice with the correct date, and in this case the mistake was not obvious.’ and ‘I wish to give no encouragement to arguments which are based on what were described to us as ‘slips of the pen’ and which I have exemplified as ‘1793’ for ‘1993’. However, an insistence on accuracy seems to me likely to simplify the task of the County Court and more importantly to enable tenants to know with certainty of their status.’
Mann LJ
[1993] 2 EGLR 51, [1993] 25 HLR 421
Housing Act 1988 20 21
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRavenseft Properties Ltd v Hall; White v Chubb; similar CA 19-Dec-2001
Parties appealed decisions as whether assured shorthold tenancy notices were valid despite errors.
Held: If, notwithstanding errors or omissions, the substance of the notice was sufficiently clear to the reasonable person reading it, then the . .
CitedMichael York, Janet Ross v LG Casey and RP Casey CA 16-Feb-1998
The plaintiffs let property to the respondents. The notice of shorthold tenancy issued prior to the tenancy commencing had obvious errors in the dates. The issue was as to its validity.
Held: The error was evident, the termination date . .
CitedDavid Andrews Lesley Andrews v Roger Brewer Ann Brewer CA 17-Feb-1997
Tenants challenged an order for possession, saying the form of notice was defective. The date specified in the notice was clearly a clerical error. It provided that the tenancy would commence on 29 May 1993 and end on 28 May 1993, on the face of it, . .
CitedClickex Ltd v McCann CA 26-May-1999
A failure by a landlord under the pre-1996 assured shorthold tenancy regime, to insert the correct tenancy dates in a shorthold notice, meant that the tenancy became an assured tenancy, since the arrangement failed to meet the requirements to create . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.187707

Sheffield City Council v Jepson: CA 1 Mar 1993

The tenant was subject to an agreement not to keep a dog in her flat. The judge agreed that the term was appropriate, and that the breach of the term was both open persistent and determined. Under those circumstances it was not reasonable for him to refuse an order for possession.
Ind Summary 01-Mar-1993, (1993) 25 HLR 299
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedJoseph v Nettleton Road Housing Co-Operative Ltd CA 16-Mar-2010
joseph_nettletonCA2010
The respondent was a mutual housing co-operative, and the claimant its tenant. The tenant kept a dog in the premises without the consent of the other tenants in breach of the terms of the lease. A notice to quit was served on him. His tenancy was . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.89206

Regina v Northavon District Council, ex parte Smith: CA 4 Aug 1993

A local Authority has a duty to act upon a housing request for children even though the family were intentionally homeless.
Independent 18-Aug-1993, Times 04-Aug-1993
Housing Act 1985, Children Act 1989
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromRegina v Northavon District Council ex parte Smith HL 18-Jul-1994
Local Authority is under no obligation to provide permanent housing for a family with children save as provided under the Act. The Children Act not to be used as a way around homelessness decisions and rules. A Social Services request to house . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.87474

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

Regina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte MacWan: CA 6 Apr 1994

A Local Authority may delay the grant of permanent accommodation to await the expiry of a short term lease. Leggatt LJ said that accommodation under section 65(2) ‘does have to be secured without limit of time and so . . be indefinite.’ Dillon LJ said that ‘the accommodation to satisfy the council’s duty must . . be ‘permanent’ in the sense in which that term is used in the cases.’
Final permanent housing may be properly achieved after several temporary accommodations.
Leggatt, Dillon LJJ
Independent 15-Apr-1994, Times 06-Apr-1994, (1994) 26 HLR 528
Housing Act 1985
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina (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.86193

City of Bradford Metropolitan Council v McMahon and McMahon: CA 21 Apr 1993

The right to buy a council house is dependant on the existence of a secure tenancy to which it is incidental, and that right disappears on the death of the tenant because there was no secure tenancy left upon which to base the right: ‘It is a creature of statute and is sui generis; if it is helpful to equate it to some more general right recognised by the courts I would prefer to describe it as analogous to a personal equity.’
Balcombe LJ
Independent 21-Apr-1993, [1994] 1 WLR 52, (1993) 25 HLR 534
Housing Act 1985 121 ff
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedJohn Nethken Zionmor v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Islington CA 10-Oct-1997
The council appealed a finding that the claimant, a secure tenant, had not surrendered his tenancy. He had sought to exercise his right to buy the property, but was said to have left the premises before the lease was completed. The property was . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.79145

Regina v Rent Officer of Kensington and Chelsea, Ex Parte Hartley: QBD 22 Mar 2001

The landlord applied to register a fair rent. The tenant resisted the claim, saying that the forms had not been correctly completed, answering questions by reference to other documents. The application form was not satisfactorily completed, but not so as to make it invalid. The landlord had intended to answer the questions. The questionaire gave the tenant enough information to allow him to know how to challenge the application, and he had not been prejudiced.
Times 22-Mar-2001
England and Wales

Updated: 08 April 2021; Ref: scu.88593

Regina v Brent London Borough Council, ex Parte Sadiq: QBD 27 Jul 2000

A housing authority which had made a decision that it had a duty to provide accommodation, could not revisit that decision once it became aware of a change of circumstances. At the time of the decision the applicant had his son living with him. After the decision but before being housed, the child was ordered to return to his mother. The applicant need not proceed by a review of the authority’s second decision.
Times 27-Jul-2000, Gazette 20-Jul-2000
England and Wales

Updated: 27 March 2021; Ref: scu.85142

Brent London Borough Council v Patel and Another: ChD 30 Nov 2000

An improvement grant made in respect of a house in multiple occupation, became repayable in whole, where the owner of the freehold took up residence in any part of the property. In applying for the grant the owner certified that part of the property would be available for active to someone not a family member. The certificates were confusing, but the words of the section did not allow the possibility of the landlord occupying any part of the house either himself or through a member of his own family.
Gazette 15-Dec-2000, Times 30-Nov-2000
Local Government and Housing Act 1989 122, 106(7)
England and Wales

Updated: 27 March 2021; Ref: scu.78573

McDonagh, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Hackney: Admn 15 Feb 2012

Application for judicial review brought by Mrs Anne McDonagh, who challenges the policy of the defendant, the London Borough of Hackney (‘Hackney’) in respect of the allocation of pitches on sites authorised and designated for use by the travelling community.
Kenneth Parker J
[2012] EWHC 373 (Admin)
Bailii

Updated: 25 March 2021; Ref: scu.452683

Haq v Eastbourne Borough Council: UTLC 10 Oct 2011

COMPENSATION – prohibition order – Housing Health and Safety Rating System Regulations – category 1 hazard – flat – crowding and space – section s584A Housing Act 1985 – S.5 Land Compensation Act 1961 – Rule 4 – whether use of flat (a) contrary to law (b) detrimental to health of the occupants – nil compensation awarded
[2011] UKUT 365 (LC), [2012] JPL 187, [2012] RVR 18
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 16 March 2021; Ref: scu.445692

Regina (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 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.
Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Taylor of Gosforth, Lord Hoffmann
[1995] UKHL 23, [1995] 3 All ER 493, [1996] 1 AC 55, [1995] 3 WLR 215, 93 LGR 581
Bailii
Housing Act 1985 62(1) 65(2)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v City of Westminster, Ex parte Chambers 1982
It was not possible for a local authority to say for homelessness purposes that a tenant had ceased to occupy property which she had never moved into. . .
CitedRegina v Hillingdon London Borough Council Ex parte Puhlhofer HL 2-Jan-1986
Not Homeless Even if Accomodation Inadequate
The applicants, a married couple, lived with a young child and later also a baby in one room of a guest house. They were given breakfast but had no cooking or washing facilities. They succeeded on a judicial review of the housing authority’s . .
CitedRegina v Waveney City Council, ex parte Bowers CA 25-May-1982
The applicant was an alcoholic and had in 1980 been hit by a motor vehicle and suffered a severe head injury. He sought judicial review of the respondent’s failure to house him.
Held: The appeal was allowed: ‘The question we have to consider . .
CitedDyson v Kerrier District Council CA 1980
Miss Dyson gave up her flat in Huntingdon and went to live in Cornwall. But the only accommodation which she had arranged for herself was a three month winter let of a cottage in Helston. She knew that the tenancy was not protected and that she . .
CitedDin (Taj) v Wandsworth London Borough Council HL 26-Nov-1981
The appellants had applied for emergency housing as homeless persons, anticipating loss of their secure accomodation after falling into arrears. The Council reject their application, but a County Court quashed that decision. The Court of Appeal . .
CitedRegina v East Hertfordshire District Council, Ex parte Hunt 1985
The applicant and her child had been accepted to be in emergency housing need, and had been given temporary bedsit accomodation in a facility they owned and managed. She had a sink, cooker and fridge, and shared bathroom and toilet facilities and a . .
At First InstanceRegina v Brent London Borough Council, Ex Parte Awua QBD 1-Jul-1993
A person refusing an offer of permanent accommodation was intentionally homeless. . .
Appeal fromRegina 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. . .
CitedRegina v Brent London Borough Council Ex Parte MacWan CA 6-Apr-1994
A Local Authority may delay the grant of permanent accommodation to await the expiry of a short term lease. Leggatt LJ said that accommodation under section 65(2) ‘does have to be secured without limit of time and so . . be indefinite.’ Dillon LJ . .

Cited by:
CitedWaltham Forest v Maloba, The Law Society CA 4-Dec-2007
The applicant had been refused accomodation as homeless after disclosing the ownership of a family home in Uganda. He had lived and worked in the UK for 15 years. The authority did not accept that it had later been repossessed. The council now . .
CitedHaile 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: 15 March 2021; Ref: scu.443217

Akhtar v Birmingham City Council: CA 12 Apr 2011

Appeal from an order in the County Court dismissing the appeal of the Appellant from a review decision of Birmingham City Council, pursuant to sections 202 and 203 of the Act, that the Respondent had discharged its duty to secure accommodation for the Appellant under section 193(2) of the Act. The reason given in the review decision letter was that the Respondent had discharged its duty by an offer to the Appellant which offer was refused by the Appellant on the ground that it was unsuitable.
Maurice Kay VP, Rimer, Etherton LJJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 383, [2011] HLR 28
Bailii
Housing Act 1996
England and Wales

Updated: 15 March 2021; Ref: scu.442541

Mew and Another v Tristmire Ltd: CA 28 Jul 2011

The claimants occupied houseboats constructed from second world war landing craft supported on non-floating platforms on land let to the respondents. They held under oral tenancies which had been terminated by the respondents before possession was sought. The appellants appealed against orders finding that they were not assured tenants within the 1988 Act on the basis that the barges were not dwelling-houses.
Maurice Kay VP, Arden, Patten LJJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 912
Bailii
Pier and Harbour Order (Bembridge Harbour) Confirmation Act 1963, Housing Act 1988 13
England and Wales

Updated: 15 March 2021; Ref: scu.442255

Regina (Painter) v Carmarthenshire County Council Housing Benefit Review Board; Regina (Murphy) v Westminster City Council and Others: QBD 16 May 2001

In each case a lodger had formed a relationship with his landlady, and had had moved to take up occupation with her, but after the relationship came to an end reverted to his status as lodger, and moved back to his for accommodation within the house. The rules provide that Housing Benefit is not payable where the applicant would be paying his rent to a former partner and the claim related to part of property he had formerly occupied whilst living in that relationship with that partner. The regulations were clear and effective to prevent the claims for housing benefit in this situation.
Times 16-May-2001
Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 No 1971 7(1) (c) (I)
England and Wales

Updated: 13 March 2021; Ref: scu.85998

Orlic v Croatia: ECHR 21 Jun 2011

48833/07, [2011] ECHR 974, [2011] HLR 44
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
Cited by:
CitedMcDonald v McDonald and Others SC 15-Jun-2016
Her parents had bought a house and granted tenancies to their adult daughter (the appellant), who suffered a personality disorder. They became unable to repay the mortgage. Receivers were appointed but the appellant fell into arrears with the rent. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 March 2021; Ref: scu.441130

Between Bristol City Council v Aldford Two Llp: UTLC 30 Mar 2011

UTLC HOUSING – enforcement action – category 1 hazard – RPT quashing improvement notice – whether lawful to do so – whether certain factors wrongly taken into account – hazard awareness notice as alternative – held this was the appropriate enforcement action – appeal dismissed – Housing Act 2004 ss 5, 28
[2011] UKUT 130 (LC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 12 March 2021; Ref: scu.440776

Brent London Borough Council v Knightley and Another: CA 26 Feb 1997

The daughter of a deceased tenant claimed succession to her mother’s interest in a tenancy which was subject to a possession order.
Held: There can be no succession to a tolerated trespasser under a former secure tenancy.
Hirst LJ, Aldous LJ, sChiemann LJ
Times 26-Feb-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 917, (1997) 29 HLR 857
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedWhite v Knowsley Housing Trust and Another CA 2-May-2007
The tenant was an assured tenant. She fell into arrears of rent and a possession order was made, but suspended on terms. The court considered whether she continued to be an assured tenant, and could assert a right to buy the property as an assured . .
CitedKnowsley Housing Trust v White; Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington; Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association HL 10-Dec-2008
The House considered situations where a secure or assured tenancy had been made subject to a suspended possession order and where despite the tenant failing to comply with the conditions, he had been allowed to continue in occupation.
Held: . .
OverruledAustin v Mayor and Burgesses of The London Borough of Southwark SC 23-Jun-2010
The appellant’s brother had been the secure tenant of the respondent Council which had in 1987 obtained an order for possession for rent arrears suspended on condition. The condition had not been complied with, but the brother had continued to live . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 February 2021; Ref: scu.78571

H, Regina v: CACD 13 Feb 2008

The judge had ruled that the evidence intended to be offered could not create offences within the 1977 Act. Verdicts of not guilty were entered. The decision was a terminating ruling. The prosecutor failed to give the appropriate section 58 undertaking on appealing.
Held: Attending to the purpose of the 2003 Act, the prosecutor’s mistake was recitified and the appeal could continue.
As to the substantial appeal, the judge had found that the tenancy or licence was an excluded one. The resident landlord having terminated the licence, the occupiers became trespassers outside the protection of the 1977 Act. However the judge had erred since the occupiers had been given a minimum term of six months which the landlord’s notice did not abridge. It could be brought to an end only for a breach of its terms.
Sir Igor Judge P, David J, David Clarke J
[2008] EWCA Crim 483
Bailii
Protection from Eviction Act 1977 1(3A)(a), Criminal Justice Act 2003 58
England and Wales

Updated: 24 February 2021; Ref: scu.406147

Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 10 May 2017

The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental difficulties which afflicted her following that incarceration. She now appealed from rejection of that claim by the County Court and the Court of Appeal.
Held: The appeal failed. Until a clear and direct judgment was available from the ECHR, the court was to follow the decision in Ali.
The appellant’s factual account had inconsistencies and the assessing officer’s factual conclusions were understandable, and disclosed no error of law.
‘The scope and limits of the concept of a ‘civil right’, as applied to entitlements in the field of public welfare, raise important issues as to the interpretation of article 6, on which the views of the Chamber are unlikely to be the last word. In my view, this is a case in which, without disrespect to the Chamber, we should not regard its decision as a sufficient reason to depart from the fully considered and unanimous conclusion of the court in Ali. It is appropriate that we should await a full consideration by a Grand Chamber before considering whether (and if so how) to modify our own position.’
The Court repeated its request for restraint in the extent and number of authorities quoted to it.
Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes
[2017] UKSC 36, [2017] 3 All ER 1065, [2017] AC 624, [2017] HLR 28, [2017] WLR(D) 323, [2017] 2 WLR 1417, UKSC 2015/0219
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 140217 am Video, SC 140217 pm Video, WLRD
Housing Act 1996, European Convention on Human Rights 6
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedTomlinson and Others v Birmingham City Council SC 17-Feb-2010
The appellant asked whether the statutory review of a housing authority’s decision on whether he was intentionally homeless was a determination of a civil right, and if so whether the review was of the appropriate standard. The claimant said that . .
Appeal fromPoshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea CA 8-Jul-2015
The claimant sought housing under the homelessness provisions. She had refused a final offer accommodation n the grounds that it brought back memories of her prison cell in Iran, and which would exacerbate the post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety . .
CitedSlater v London Borough of Lewisham CA 12-Apr-2006
The applicant was heavily pregnant when she was offered a first floor one bedroomed flat. She rejected it.
Held: When a housing authority reviewed its decision on the applicant’s decision not to accept the accommodation offered, that review . .
CitedHolmes-Moorhouse v Richmond Upon Thames HL 4-Feb-2009
The father had been awarded shared residence for three children. He asked the local authority to provide appropriate housing.
Held: The authority’s appeal succeeded.
‘When any family court decides with whom the children of separated . .
CitedEl-Dinnaoui v Westminster City Council CA 20-Mar-2013
The appellant and his family sought rehousing. The appellant’s wife had a medically-confirmed history of anxiety due to fear of heights. They were offered a flat on the 16th floor. She became distressed on leaving after the inspection and collapsed . .
CitedFazia Ali v The United Kingdom ECHR 20-Oct-2015
The Court considered the duties imposed on housing authorities under Part VII of the 1996 Act.
Held: Article 6.1 did apply, but in any event the procedure applied under the Act conformed to its requirements. . .
CitedFeldbrugge v The Netherlands ECHR 29-May-1986
The court was asked whether the applicant’s entitlement to a statutory sickness allowance, which was a contributory scheme but for which she had not registered due to illness, was a civil right within the meaning of article 6.
Held: The . .
CitedSalesi v Italy ECHR 26-Feb-1993
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings . .
CitedMennitto v Italy ECHR 5-Oct-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings . .
CitedTsfayo v The United Kingdom ECHR 14-Nov-2006
The applicant challenged the prodecures for deciding her appeal against the council’s refusal to pay backdated housing benefits. She complained that the availability of judicial review of the decision was not adequate.
Held: The system did not . .
CitedSchuler-Zgraggen v Switzerland ECHR 24-Jun-1993
The court considered a contributory invalidity scheme: ‘today the general rule is that Article 6(1) does apply in the field of social insurance, including even welfare assistance . . State intervention is not sufficient to establish that Article . .
CitedLoiseau v France ECHR 28-Sep-2004
ECHR Judgment (Merits) – No violation of Art. 6-1.
The court referred to ‘a ‘private right’ which can be said, at least on arguable grounds, to be recognised under domestic law’ and to ‘an individual right . .
CitedBourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods . .
CitedStec and Others v United Kingdom ECHR 6-Jul-2005
. .
CitedNzolameso v City of Westminster SC 2-Apr-2015
The court was asked ‘When is it lawful for a local housing authority to accommodate a homeless person a long way away from the authority’s own area where the homeless person was previously living? ‘ The claimant said that on applying for housing she . .
CitedLondon Borough of Newham v Adan CA 14-Dec-2001
The applicant was a Dutch national. She appealed for housing as a homeless person. The local authority, after review found her not to have a settled intention to stay in England. She appealed, to the County Court, and succeeded, and the Authority . .
CitedBoulois v Luxembourg ECHR 3-Apr-2012
(Grand Chamber) The claimant complained that as a prisoner he had been deprived of his right to a fair hearing and his right of access to a court in connection with the decisions refusing his requests for prison leave.
Held: The complaint was . .
CitedManchester City Council v Pinnock SC 9-Feb-2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . .
CitedRegina v Hillingdon London Borough Council Ex parte Puhlhofer HL 2-Jan-1986
Not Homeless Even if Accomodation Inadequate
The applicants, a married couple, lived with a young child and later also a baby in one room of a guest house. They were given breakfast but had no cooking or washing facilities. They succeeded on a judicial review of the housing authority’s . .
CitedKeyu and Others v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Another SC 25-Nov-2015
The Court was asked whether the respondents should be required to hold a public inquiry into a controversial series of events in 1948, when a Scots Guards patrol was alleged to shot and killed 24 unarmed civilians in a village called Batang Kali, in . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.582172