‘Adesotu v Lewisham London Borough Council (2019) EWCA Civ 1405. We first saw this case as a county court appeal where the central issue was whether Equality Act 2010 issues could be raised and decided within a section 204 Housing Act 1996 homelessness appeal. HHJ Luba QC held that they could not, and the matter went to the Court of Appeal.’
Nearly Legal, 11th August 2019
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has held that a homeless person cannot raise alleged breaches of the Equality Act 2010 in a homelessness appeal before a county court judge.’
Local Government Lawyer, 8th August 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘An Airbnb host who rented out his central London council flat to tourists has been fined £100,000 and evicted.’
BBC News, 29th July 2019
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Sophie Crampton, barrister of 4 Brick Court, considers what purpose the provision might serve in determining care proceedings.’
Family Law Week, 26th July 2019
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has launched a consultation on implementing the government’s decision to remove section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 and improving section 8 eviction grounds.’
Local Government Lawyer, 23rd July 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Campaigners have welcomed government plans to open up its rogue landlord database to prospective tenants, as part of proposals to give greater protection to renters.’
The Guardian, 21st July 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A solicitor who engaged in a four-year row over a wheelie bin has been cleared of harassing his doctor neighbour after a judge ruled he was entitled to protect his property.’
Daily Telegraph, 15th July 2019
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The Regulator of Social Housing is running a consultation on changes to its guidance on intervention, enforcement and use of powers. Sarah Greenhalgh analyses the proposals.’
Local Government Lawyer, 12th July 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A parish council has failed in a High Court challenge to a decision by the development control committee at Arun District Council to grant outline permission for the development of a portion of land allocated for up to 400 dwellings.’
Local Government Lawyer, 8th July 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Essex County Council has settled a judicial review challenge brought on behalf of a 16-year-old homeless child, admitting that it had operated an unlawful practice of turning homeless children away from care in breach of section 20 of the Children Act 1989.’
Local Government Lawyer, 4th July 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A non-Jewish woman, Z, had four children, including a son with autism. She was at the top of Hackney Council’s list for a four-bedroom home in the area. The co-defendant, the Agudas Israel Housing Association (AIHA), was founded in 1986 to provide social housing for Orthodox Jews in north London: it does not accept applications from anyone outside the Orthodox community. Six four-bedroom properties owned by AIHA became available but Ms Z was not allowed to apply for one of them. She sought judicial review of that refusal, arguing that it was unlawful and discriminatory for the AIHA to refuse her a home. As we noted, in R (Z & Ors) v Hackney London Borough Council & Anor [2019] EWHC 139 (Admin), a Divisional Court dismissed her claim, holding that a Jewish housing association might legitimately refuse to rent houses to those who were not Orthodox Jews. Z appealed.’
Law & Religion UK, 5th July 2019
Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com
‘The Supreme Court will this week (3 July) hear an appeal on whether social security tribunals have the power or duty to calculate entitlement to housing benefit without making deductions for under-occupancy, where the application of regulations would breach claimants’ rights under the Human Rights Act.’
Local Government Lawyer, 2nd July 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has rejected an appeal against a Divisional Court ruling that a charitable housing association’s arrangements for allocating housing, which amount to direct discrimination on the ground of religion, were lawful.’
Local Government Lawyer, 27th June 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Victims of discrimination were being denied access to justice and offenders going unchallenged as a result of a ‘failing’ legal aid system, as reported in the Justice Gap.’
Legal Voice, 21st June 2019
Source: legalvoice.org.uk
‘The High Court has been asked to intervene in a £300,000 inheritance row between step siblings over which parent died first.’
Daily Telegraph, 25th June 2019
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Samuels v Birmingham City Council [2019] UKSC 28. In unanimously allowing an appeal against a decision to declare the appellant intentionally homeless due to her inability to pay her rent, the Supreme Court affirmed that non-housing benefits are not designed to create a surplus that can be used to account for insufficient housing benefits.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th June 2019
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A businessman was forced to live in a pigsty after he accused his ex partner of having an affair, a court has heard.
The pigsty was in the grounds of the £1m home in Upminster, Essex, and he told Central London County Court that his ex partner of 37 years excluded him from the house.
The couple, who have two children, ended up in court after he launched a claim to claim money from her for the time he spent living out of the home.’
Daily Telegraph, 19th June 2019
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Samuels v Birmingham City Council (2019) UKSC 28. The Supreme Court, finally, has delivered its judgment on the issue of the assessment of “reasonable expenses” when considering the affordability of rent in homelessness decisions.’
Nearly Legal, 16th June 2019
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The supreme court has ordered a council to reconsider its decision to declare a single mother of four to be “intentionally homeless” because she was unable to afford the rent.’
The Guardian, 12th June 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Poole Borough Council v GN and another [2019] UKSC 25. The Supreme Court has found that Poole Borough Council did not owe a duty of care to two children, CN and GN, who it failed to re-house, despite the fact that they were suffering abuse from their neighbours. However, the court overruled previous authority and found that in some situations a duty of care might arise.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 7th June 2019
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025