Court of Appeal
Waltham Forest London Borough Council v Saleh
[2019] EWCA Civ 1944
2019 Oct 8;
Nov 19
Patten, Asplin LJJ, Sir Rupert Jackson
Local governmentHomeless personsReview of local housing authority decisionAccommodation provided in neighbouring authorityLocal authority confirming original decision on suitability of accommodation on reviewAuthority not considering availability of any other suitable accommodation within or closer to the authority’s area at time of reviewWhether authority under duty to make such a consideration Housing Act 1996 (c 52) (as amended by Localism Act 2011 (c 20), s 149(9) and Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 (c 13), s 9(2)(3)), s 202(1))

The local housing authority, having concluded that it owed to the applicant the full housing duty under section 193 of the Housing Act 1996, offered temporary accommodation to the applicant and his family, including his diabetic daughter, in a neighbouring London borough. Having initially accepted the offer, the applicant requested rehousing within the authority’s area to be as near as possible to his daughter’s support network. The local authority considered the accommodation to be suitable and declined the request. On the applicant’s request for a review of the decision to accommodate out of borough under section 202(1) of the Housing Act 1996, the review officer, in taking into account the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (February 2018), reaffirmed the decision on suitability. In allowing the applicant’s appeal, the judge held that the review officer erred in failing to consider the availability of any other suitable accommodation within or closer to the authority’s area at the time of the review.

On the authority’s appeal—

Held, appeal dismissed. A local housing authority’s duty to investigate the availability of any other suitable accommodation within or closer to the authority’s area applied both at the time of the original decision on the suitability of particular accommodation and when the authority conducted a review of that homelessness decision under section 202(1) of the Housing Act 1996. Paragraph 17.8 of the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out the duty of an authority to keep the suitability of accommodation under review. It followed that the obligation on the authority to review its decision to secure accommodation for the applicant out of borough had required it to reconsider that decision in the light of all material circumstances at the date of the review hearing, including the availability of suitable accommodation either within or closer to its district and the school which his daughter attended. It was common ground that the review officer had not taken into account such material circumstances. Accordingly, the judge had been right to allow the appeal and to set aside the review decision (paras 32, 33, 39, 40, 41, 42).

Mohamed v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council [2002] 1 AC 547, HL(E), Omar v Westminster City Council [2008] HLR 36, CA, Abed v Westminster City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 1406, CA and Temur v Hackney London Borough Council [2015] PTSR 1, CA applied.

Nicholas Grundy QC and Victoria Osler (instructed by Head of Legal Services, Waltham Forest London Borough Council) for the local housing authority.

Ben Chataway (instructed by SA Law Chambers Solicitors, Ilford) for the applicant.

Scott McGlinchey, Barrister

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies