Ciftci v London Borough of Haringey

Ciftci v London Borough of Haringey

The reviewing officer was entitled to conclude, based on the information provided and inquiries made, that Ms Ciftci gave up settled accommodation in Switzerland without sufficient planning or investigation, was not unaware of any relevant fact, and acted deliberately, thus was intentionally homeless under section 191 of the Housing Act 1996.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Songul Ciftci; Defendant/respondent: The Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Haringey
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Intentional Homelessness, Duty to Investigate, Procedural Fairness
Housing Law Administrative Law Intentional Homelessness Duty to Investigate Procedural Fairness

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Songul Ciftci

Claimant/appellant

The Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Haringey

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was intentionally homeless under section 191 of the Housing Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the reviewing officer made sufficient inquiries into the appellant's circumstances
  3. 3 Whether procedural unfairness occurred in the review process

Ratio Decidendi

The reviewing officer was entitled to conclude, based on the information provided and inquiries made, that Ms Ciftci gave up settled accommodation in Switzerland without sufficient planning or investigation, was not unaware of any relevant fact, and acted deliberately, thus was intentionally homeless under section 191 of the Housing Act 1996.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; no further relief granted