Naghshbandi, R (on the application of) v London Borough Of Camden & Ors [2001] EWHC Admin 813 (19th October, 2001)

Naghshbandi, R (on the application of) v London Borough Of Camden & Ors [2001] EWHC Admin 813 (19th October, 2001)

On a proper construction of the relevant provisions, the defendants were entitled to include the son for apportionment purposes. The deeming provision preventing students from claiming housing benefit does not exclude them from being counted as liable for rent apportionment. The original and review decisions contained no misdirection of law.

Citation
[2001] EWHC Admin 813
Parties
Claimant: Simin Naghshbandi; First Defendant: London Borough of Camden; Second Defendant: London Borough of Camden Housing Benefit Review Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Housing Benefit, Apportionment of Rent, Student Status and Benefits, Judicial Review Procedure
Administrative Law Social Security Law Housing Benefit Apportionment of Rent Student Status and Benefits Judicial Review Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simin Naghshbandi

Claimant

London Borough of Camden

First Defendant

London Borough of Camden Housing Benefit Review Board

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a full-time student, deemed not liable for housing benefit purposes, should be excluded from apportionment of rent liability under Housing Benefit Regulations.
  2. 2 Whether the refusal to review the decision under Regulation 79(1)(c) was lawful.

Ratio Decidendi

On a proper construction of the relevant provisions, the defendants were entitled to include the son for apportionment purposes. The deeming provision preventing students from claiming housing benefit does not exclude them from being counted as liable for rent apportionment. The original and review decisions contained no misdirection of law.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • Defendants awarded costs against claimant, subject to public funding provisions