Tag Archive for 's.204 appeal'

Costs on settled appeals

By NL on 02/04/2012. 0 Comments

A quick note on a useful case on costs where an appeal has been settled. Harripaul v London Borough of Lewisham [2012] EWCA Civ 266 was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a failed S.204 appeal to the County Court on a homeless matter.

The appeal was given permission, and Rimer LJ

expressed the view that the appellant had a real prospect of showing that the reviewing officer’s decision was materially deficient and that the judge’s upholding of it reflected unjustified benevolence. I regarded the appeal as having merit and I also considered that it would give this court the opportunity to give any necessary guidance as to

… 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: , , , .

Support and suitability

By NL on 12/07/2009. 0 Comments

Abdullah v City of Westminster [2007] EWCA Civ 1566 is not a new case. In fact it is two years old, but the transcript of the Court of Appeal judgement has only just come out (and it isn’t on Bailii). So we’ll do a brief note.

The case was a second appeal from a s.204 appeal to a Circuit judge. There has indeed been a previous appeal, in which HHJ Collins had quashed a review decision and required a fresh decision. This appeal was from the second decision.

Mrs Abdullah was a refugee from Yemen. She was accommodated in Barnet but moved to Westminster (with Barnet’s encouragement) as there was … Read the full post

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

Article 6, outsourced reviews and bias.

By NL on 31/05/2009. 13 Comments

The outsourcing of s.202 Housing Act 1996 reviews by local authorities to private, commercial bodies came under scrutiny in Charlotte Augustin v London Borough of Barnet, Central London County Court, 22 May 2009 (no report available online yet). There are a couple of Court of Appeal cases on the same issue coming up, so we will be revisiting it.

This was a s.204 appeal, heard by Mr Recorder Hollington QC, of a s.202 review decision, purportedly by Barnet, upholding their decision that an offer of temporary accommodation had been suitable. The s.202 decision was actually made by Mr Minos Perdios, the director of Housing Reviews Limited (HRL), a private … Read the full post

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

Who wants to know?

By J on 20/02/2009. 2 Comments

A very odd case was noted on Lawtel this morning – AB v Leicester City Council, Court of Appeal, 19.2.09. ([2009] EWCA Civ 192)

AB had applied under Part 7, Housing Act 1996, to Leicester City Council (“Leicester”) for assistance as a homeless person. It appears that, at both the s.184 and s.202 stages, the City Council had rejected the application on the basis that AB refused to provide any personal information so as to enable Leicester to properly assess her application. AB had also refused to allow Leicester to make any enquiries from relevant third parties in order that they might gleam information about her history. … Read the full post

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

S.204 Appeal out of time

By NL on 12/07/2008. 0 Comments

Barrett v LB Southwark [2008] EWHC 1568 (Comm) was an appeal of a dismissed application for permission to make a s.204 appeal out of time on an intentional homelessness decision upheld at s.202 review. For some reason it was heard in the Commercial Court (?) and it isn’t yet on Bailii, but is on Lawtel for those that have access.

First a note of the judgment, and then a spot of finger pointing.

Ms Barrett is profoundly deaf with three children, two under 18. She became homeless after a mortgage repossession, because she couldn’t keep up payments. After application to Southwark as homeless, she was notified on 2 July 2007 … Read the full post

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