Category Archives: Housing law – All

The meaning of care and attention

Posted on by
Reply

SL v Westminster [2013] UKSC 27 is a very important case concerning the meaning of “care and attention” in the context of s.21, National Assitance Act 1948.

We can only apologise for not writing it up sooner. All we can say is that the nearlylegal backlog of cases is threatening to rival the UK Border Agency’s backlog of immigration and asylum cases.

Facts

SL was a failed asylum seeker. He approached Westminster and asked that they provide him with accommodation under s.21, National Assistance Act 1948.

Section 21 provides that an authority is under a duty to provide persons with accommodation if:

1) by reason of age, disability, mental illness … Read the full post

Night Shelters, dwellings and housing benefit

Posted on by
2

This a late note on OR -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Isle of Anglesey CC [2013] UKUT 065 (AAC) because, bluntly, I had read it quickly at the time and overlooked its broader significance.

The issue was whether OR could receive housing benefit for his stays in a night shelter hostel. The First Tier Tribunal had held that a hostel was a dwelling for the purposes of the housing benefit regulations, because the regulations said it was. However, the First Tier found that OR was not occupying it as his home.

On appeal to the Upper Tribunal, this was found to be wrong. While the regulations … Read the full post

Priority need

Posted on by
Reply

Hotak v Southwark LBC [2013] EWCA Civ 515 concerned a short point on whether an authority was entitled to have regard to the assistance that a homeless person would receive, in the event he became homeless, when determining whether he was vulnerable or not.

The facts of the case were this: Mr Hotak had come to London with his brother. They moved into a flat in Peckham. They were asked to leave the flat and both approached Southwark for assistance (albeit Mr Hotak’s brother at that time was ineligible for assistance and so the application was made in Mr Hotak’s name only).

Southwark accepted that Mr Hotak’s suffered from depression, … Read the full post

Being civil

Posted on by
1

Morshead Mansions has been involved in a quite astonishing amount of litigation. Bailii throws up 13 hits (here), cases in the LVT, Lands Tribunal, High Court and Court of Appeal. It’s really must be the most awful burden on all those involved. And now, there is another case to add to the list, Di Marco v Morshead Mansions Ltd [2013] EWHC 1068 (Ch).

Morshead Mansions Ltd is a lessee-owned company. It holds the freehold of (appropriately enough) Morshead Mansions, a block of 104 or so flats. It has two different ways of raising money. The first (and most common) is via the service charge. It seems that, at … Read the full post

Yet another one…

Posted on by
2

The Leasehold Reform Act 1967 gives qualifying long leaseholders of houses the right, inter alia, to acquire the freehold. The definition of “house” is quite technical, but, in essence, it turns on whether it could reasonably be called a house (even if it could reasonably be called something else). There is a quite eye-watering amount of law on this issue, most recently Day v Hosebay Ltd; Howard de Walden v Lexgorge [2012] UKSC 41 (our note here).

In general terms, many of these cases are worth quite a lot of money. Which means that they get appealed (and appealed, and appealed). In Henley and another v Cohen [2013] … Read the full post

Bedroom Tax Judicial Review update

Posted on by
1

Just to note that the 10 joined bedroom tax Judicial Review claims (for initial details see our note) are listed for full hearing on Wednesday to Friday next week (15-17 May). The claims involve a range of challenges to the regulations involving disabled adults, disabled children and children unable to share rooms for other reasons.

More details as soon as we get them.… Read the full post

To be incurred or not to be incurred?

Posted on by
6

Those with good memories will remember that a year or so ago the Upper Tribunal gave judgment in a case called Om Property Management Ltd v Burr (our note here) in which the issue was at what point in time does a cost became incurred for the purposes of s.20B, Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. It decided that costs became incurred on the presentation of an invoice or on payment.

Mr Burr appealed against that decision and the Court of Appeal recently gave its judgment on the subject (judgment here).

The facts, for those too lazy to click the link above, were that in November 2007, through … Read the full post