Paley v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2022] EWCA Civ 112 (04 February 2022)

Paley v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2022] EWCA Civ 112 (04 February 2022)

The local authority failed to conduct an objective, evidence-based affordability assessment tailored to the appellant's circumstances, omitting reasonable expenses and failing to comply with statutory guidance and legal principles. No reasonable authority could have concluded the property was affordable on the available evidence, and the main housing duty was not discharged.

Citation
[2022] EWCA Civ 112
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Lisa Paley; Defendant/respondent: The London Borough of Waltham Forest
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal From County Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Ground 2 (affordability assessment) succeeds, Ground 1 (reasonableness of inquiries) fails.
Legal Topics
Homelessness Duty, Affordability Assessment, Judicial Review Principles, Suitability of Accommodation, Children's Welfare in Housing Decisions
Housing Law Administrative Law Social Welfare Law Homelessness Duty Affordability Assessment Judicial Review Principles Suitability of Accommodation Children's Welfare in Housing Decisions

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lisa Paley

Claimant/appellant

The London Borough of Waltham Forest

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Appeal From County Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the local authority made proper inquiries and conducted an appropriate objective assessment of the affordability of the property offered to the appellant under s 193(2) Housing Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the review process and inquiries satisfied statutory and judicial review requirements, particularly regarding affordability and the welfare of children

Ratio Decidendi

The local authority failed to conduct an objective, evidence-based affordability assessment tailored to the appellant's circumstances, omitting reasonable expenses and failing to comply with statutory guidance and legal principles. No reasonable authority could have concluded the property was affordable on the available evidence, and the main housing duty was not discharged.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Ground 2 (affordability assessment) succeeds, Ground 1 (reasonableness of inquiries) fails.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed on the ground that the local authority failed to conduct a lawful affordability assessment; the main housing duty under s 193(2) Housing Act 1996 remains undischarged.