Yemshaw v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 15 Dec 2009

‘The sole but important issue on this appeal is the meaning of ‘violence’ in section 177(1) of the Housing Act 1996 (‘the Act’). The question is whether, for the purposes of that provision, ‘violence’ requires some sort of physical contact or whether, in the context of ‘domestic violence’, it should be understood more widely as including abusive behaviour such as psychological, sexual or financial abuse.’
Etherton, Waller, Laws LJJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 1543, [2010] HLR 23
Housing Act 1996 177(1)
England and Wales
BindingRoyal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Danesh CA 5-Oct-2006
The tenant family appealed against a decision that the authority had no duty to rehouse them after they suffered violence. They had been living for a year in Swansea and on being granted indefinite leave to remain they were now eligible under Part . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromYemshaw v London Borough of Hounslow SC 26-Jan-2011
The appellant sought housing after leaving her home to escape domestic violence. The violence was short of physical violence, and the authority had denied a duty to rehouse her. She said that the term ‘domestic violence’ in the Act was not intended . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 February 2021; Ref: scu.425503