Etcetera.

A few bits.

There are four new FTT bedroom tax decisions on the FTT page, including one from Manchester where subsidence was classed as a ‘natural catastrophe’ for the purposes of continuity of property for the 1996 exemption. There are two room size and use decisions, and one Article 14 disability decision – although this predated the Upper Tribunal decision in CSH/188/2014. The Article 14 case effectively finds that the Council as landlord had made a promise to the severely disabled tenant of ‘a home for life’ and as benefit authority, should not be allowed to resile from that.

The promise having been given the appellant had a legitimate expectation that her present accommodation would be her home for life and there is no overriding public policy requirement that justifies resiling from that promise. There is a straightforward means of keeping the promise. The fact that it involves a modest increase in public expenditure does not constitute sufficient reason for going back on the promise.

While there is certainly a strong moral case for this, I am not sure that the FTT establishes a legal basis for reaching this decision.

The Upper Tribunal judgment on room size is still awaited, though rumour has it that the DWP team took a pounding over the suggestion that a room was still a bedroom if you had to stand on the bed to get dressed.

I did a seminar on tenancy deposits, with David Smith, also of NL and Philippa Graham. It was, alarmingly, filmed and is available for free. There are three videos. Philippa covers the structure of the post Localism Act Deposit rules and the Superstrike decision. Then I cover the effect of Spuerstrike and over recent decisions. David then covers the proposed changes in the Deregulation Bill and what they do and do not do.

Screenshot 2014-10-19 16.57.54

And it has been and will be a busy time for housing cases in the Supreme Court. Many thanks to Jan Luba QC for the following roundup.

The following have been heard and await judgment:
Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Limited on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/17.html
Sims on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/12.html
CN and ZH on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/805.html

The following are listed for hearing this term:
Loveridge on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/494.html
Hotak on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/515.html
Akerman-Livingstone on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/1081.html

This has permission but is not yet listed:
Samin on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1468.html

The following are among those awaiting decisions on permission in the Supreme Court:
Kanu on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/1085.html
Johnson on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/752.html
McDonald on appeal from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/1049.html

About Giles Peaker

Giles Peaker is a solicitor and partner in the Housing and Public Law team at Anthony Gold Solicitors in South London. You can find him on Linkedin and on Twitter. Known as NL round these parts, and still is Nearly Legal on Google +.
Posted in Benefits, Deposits, Housing law - All and tagged , , .

One Comment

  1. Scott v Southern Pacific to be handed down on Wednesday.

    And as those involved have been quick to point out elsewhere, Samin v Westminster is being heard by the SC in March, while Haile v Waltham Forest is on in January.

Leave a Reply (We can't offer advice on individual issues)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.