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.
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
Legal Issues
- 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 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.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment