Alghile v City Of Westminster [2001] EWCA Civ 363 (2 March 2001)

Alghile v City Of Westminster [2001] EWCA Civ 363 (2 March 2001)

An applicant cannot accept an offer of accommodation under section 193(5) of the Housing Act 1996 and simultaneously request a review of its suitability; acceptance is unqualified and discharges the authority's duty. There is no statutory requirement for the authority to inform the applicant of a right to accept and request a review. The decision in Byfield was wrongly decided.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 363
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Nadine Alghile; Appellant/defendant: The Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal disposed of by making no order; order for costs below to stand; no order for costs on the appeal; legal aid taxation of respondent's costs; permission to appeal to House of Lords refused.
Legal Topics
Homelessness, Statutory Interpretation, Local Authority Duties, Review of Suitability of Accommodation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nadine Alghile

Respondent/claimant

The Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether an applicant can accept an offer of accommodation under section 193(5) of the Housing Act 1996 and simultaneously request a review of its suitability under section 202.
  2. 2 Whether the local authority must inform the applicant of a right to accept and request a review.

Ratio Decidendi

An applicant cannot accept an offer of accommodation under section 193(5) of the Housing Act 1996 and simultaneously request a review of its suitability; acceptance is unqualified and discharges the authority's duty. There is no statutory requirement for the authority to inform the applicant of a right to accept and request a review. The decision in Byfield was wrongly decided.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed of by making no order; order for costs below to stand; no order for costs on the appeal; legal aid taxation of respondent's costs; permission to appeal to House of Lords refused.

Orders

  • No order on the appeal.
  • Order for costs made below to stand.