Tag Archive for 'judicial-review'

Page 2 of 5

Brave New World or Same Old Story

By chief on 04/11/2010. 28 Comments

Pinnock v Manchester City Council [2010] UKSC 45 (Supreme Court pdf & BAILII links)

Whenever a battle weary group of housing lawyers gets together, conversation inevitably turns (after the routine complaints about the less congenial DJs) to the thorny issue of which is the most important housing law case of all. While bizarre to the outsider, this ritual actually takes the form of a Mornington Crescent-style game, in which the aim is to get to Street v Mountford before somebody plays Puhlhofer and ruins the whole thing. The route to get there varies, although it will normally take in Awua, Pereira, Runa Begum, Din v Wandsworth… Read the full post

Posted in ASB, FLW case note, Housing law - All, Introductory and Demoted tenancies and Possession. Tags: , , , , , , .

Probably wrong but wholly academic

By NL on 15/03/2010. 7 Comments

Raw, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Lambeth [2010] EWHC 507 (Admin)

This case is a vivid illustration of the difficulties of challenging a Local Authority’s apparent homelessness gatekeeping practices, or alternatively, if you are a Local Authority, a clear example of tactical defences to such a challenge.

The problem is that a claim for judicial review seeking to address, in part, the lawfulness of a policy, rests pretty much entirely on the impact of the policy on the individual claimant. Thus the astute Council settles the effect on the Claimant, leaving the broader policy issue as academic and pretty much impossible to pursue.

In this case, … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Homeless and Housing law - All. Tags: , , .

Perhaps you should get a move on?

By J on 17/02/2010. 0 Comments

R (Joseph) v LB Newham [2009] EWHC 2983 (Admin)

We noted the permission decision in this case back in September 2009 when I expressed the view that, if Newham lost this case then some fish-based humiliation was due to them. Well, the claim for judicial review has now been allowed and I stand by my view. A woeful display by LB Newham, I think you’ll all agree.

Mr Joseph was the secure tenant of LB Newham in a one-bed property and had been since 1992. The property was now severely overcrowded, as he lived there with his wife and two children. Under the terms of the allocation scheme, he was … Read the full post

Posted in Allocation, Housing law - All and Uncategorized. Tags: , .

Rent arrears, transfers and Weaver in operation

By NL on 07/01/2010. 13 Comments

McIntyre & Anor, R (on the application of) v Gentoo Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 5 (Admin)

This was the judicial review of North Sunderland Housing Company’s refusal to permit an exchange of homes by the Claimants, joint assured tenants, with another NSHC assured tenant. NSHC are a subsidiary company of Gentoo and no points were taken on whether Gentoo were the proper Defendant. NSHC had refused to permit the exchange unless Mr McIntyre paid off an historic debt for rent arrears accrued when he lived at another property as a tenant of Sunderland City Council. Originally Mr & Mrs were joint tenants of Sunderland City Council in the property, prior … Read the full post

Posted in assured-tenancy, FLW case note and Housing law - All. Tags: , , , .

Gimme shelter

By J on 12/12/2009. 11 Comments

R (Garbet) v Circle 33 Housing Trust and another [2009] EWHC 3153 (Admin) [link is to a .doc] was discussed by us (via news reports in Inside Housing and on Radio 4) below. I asked for a transcript and, as if by magic, one was provided. I stand by my original view that this is actually a bit of a damp squib and certainly doesn’t give rise to any point of general importance (at least, in terms of law. I don’t dispute the factual importance to the Claimant). The more interesting points are the ones not (fully) argued but hinted at towards the end of the judgment . Anyway…

The … Read the full post

Posted in Community care, FLW case note and Housing law - All. Tags: , , .

Penal Notices on Admin Court orders?

By NL on 15/10/2009. 3 Comments

MSA v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC 2474 (Admin)

A technical point on judicial review cases here, but as it is something I’ve run up against in the past, I think it is interesting.

Collins J considers whether a penal notice should be attached to an order of the Administrative Court made against a public body. This would usually be made out against a named senior officer of the authority and enable an application for committal of the officer on breach of the order. They are, on County Court orders in, for instance enforcement of an order in a disrepair case, remarkably effective in my limited experience. However, Collins … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note and Housing law - All. Tags: , , , , .

Without exception

By J on 15/09/2009. 0 Comments

R (Joseph) v LB Newham [2008] EWHC 1637 (Admin)

Blanket policies are unlawful. A first year law undergraduate could tell you that. Any lawyer or public body which didn’t know that would deserve public humilliation, probably involving being slapped across the face with a fish. Even a cursory flick through a public law text book would give you ample support for this elementary proposition of public law.

It is, therefore, something of a surprise to see Stadlen J dealing with… a blanket policy.

Mr and Mrs Joseph are secure tenants of the London Borough of Newham. At some time in the distant past, he was overpaid certain monies (probably … Read the full post

Posted in Allocation, FLW case note and Housing law - All. Tags: , , .
row of sheds footer image
5 pages