Tag Archive for 's.202 review'

When should an offer be ‘suitable’?

By NL on 06/12/2011. 0 Comments

Abed v City of Westminster [2011] EWCA Civ 1406

Is an offer of temporary accommodation under s.193(5) Housing Act 1996 unlawful if the Local Authority has not assessed the suitability of the accommodation before making the offer? This was the issue before the Court of Appeal.

Ms A had had her homeless application accepted by Westminster. She and her son were offered temporary accommodation in Ilford. Ms A said that it was not suitable, in part because she was acting as the carer for a disabled nephew in Paddington 5 days a week. She also referred to her and her son’s medical conditions. She requested a review (without having accepted … Read the full post

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

Contracting out reviews

By Dave on 04/07/2011. 0 Comments

In Karaj v Three Rivers DC [2011] EWCA Civ 768, Ward and Rimer LJJ granted permission to appeal on what appears to be the “Shacklady” issue (links to our report), viz whether a failure to follow the proper rules regarding the contracting out of the review process invalidates the (entire) review itself.  Three Rivers DC had contracted out their reviews to a well-known contractor.  Before HHJ Faber, the Shacklady argument had been unsuccessful. Permission was refused by the MR on the papers but granted after a renewed application for permission by Christopher Baker – to whom many congrats – on the basis that here there is an appeal … Read the full post

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

Never apologise, never explain

By NL on 12/04/2011. 5 Comments

Akhtar v Birmingham City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 383 [not on bailii yet, we've seen a transcript]

When a Local Authority accepts the applicant’s case on a review under s.202 review under Housing Act 1996, is there or should there be a duty to give reasons why the applicant was successful and on what objections they were not successful?

This was the combined permission and substantive hearing of a second appeal from a s.204 appeal to the County Court.

Ms Akhtar was a homeless person. Birmingham had accepted a full duty following her application. Birmingham had offered a permanent property at
41 Twickenham Road, in the Kingstanding area of the … Read the full post

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

Face time

By NL on 03/04/2011. 7 Comments

Makisi & Ors v Birmingham City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 355

Does the right to make oral submissions to a review officer on a s.202 Housing Act 1996 review, following a ‘minded to’ letter, mean that the applicant has the right to insist on a meeting?

This was the Court of Appeal hearing of three joined second appeals, from s.204 appeals to the County Court. All three appellants were appealing review decisions by Birmingham City Council. One of the County Court appeals, that of Ms Makisi, we previously reported here. The other appellants were Mr Yosief and Mr Nagi.

I won’t go into detail of the facts in each case. … Read the full post

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

What to review?

By NL on 31/01/2011. 0 Comments
Nzamy v Brent London Borough Council Court of Appeal, January 26, 2011 [Arden eflash 420. Not on Bailii yet, but we've seen a transcript of the extempore judgment]
The appellant and family were in permanent accomodation provided by Brent following a previous homeless application. Following reports of threatened violence against them relayed to Brent, which  appears to have been effectively taken as a homeless application, Brent made an offer of alternative accommodation in December 2008. Mr & Mrs Nzamy did not consider that the property offered was suitable. Brent wrote to them stating:

Should you not accept, the Council will construe that it has DISCHARGED ITS STATUTORY DUTY to you.

… Read the full post

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

Reviews of Suitability and Discharge of Duty

By NL on 05/07/2010. 4 Comments

Ravichandran & Anor v London Borough of Lewisham [2010] EWCA Civ 755

Or Omar v Birmingham City Council [2007] EWCA Civ 610 revisted. This was the Court of Appeal hearing of a second appeal from a s.204 Housing Act 1996 appeal at the County Court on Lewisham’s discharge of duty under s.193 Housing Act 1996. it is a significant decision on the nature and extent of s.202 reviews of offers of accommodation under s.193 and of discharge of duty. The Court sets out guidelines on this issue.

Briefly, the facts were that Lewisham owed Mr & Mrs R the full housing duty following their homeless application. Eventually, they were offered … Read the full post

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

Missing letters, Reviews and Determinations of Civil Rights

By NL on 18/02/2010. 16 Comments

Tomlinson & Ors v Birmingham City Council [2010] UKSC 8

This is the Supreme Court judgment on the appeal from the Court of Appeal of what was then called Ali & Ibrahim v Birmingham City Council [2008] EWCA 1228 [our report here]. At issue was whether the Housing Act 1996 s.202 review and s.204 appeal to the County Court procedure was compatible with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Or pace Lord Hope:

i) Does an appeal under section 204 of the 1996 Act involve the determination of a “civil right” for the purposes of article 6(1) either generally or in cases such as the … Read the full post

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