Aw-Aden v Birmingham City Council
Section 191(2) did not apply because the appellant's belief in finding work and accommodation in the UK was not a sufficiently specific relevant fact; it was an aspiration rather than a fact based on genuine investigation. The Council and Review Panel did not err in law by failing to apply section 191(2).
- Parties
- Appellant: AW-Aden; Respondent: Birmingham City Council
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 07 December 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Second Appeal From County Court Decision Under Section 204 of the Housing Act 1996
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Intentional Homelessness, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation, Procedural Fairness
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
AW-Aden
Appellant
Birmingham City Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal From County Court Decision Under Section 204 of the Housing Act 1996
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant was intentionally homeless under section 191 of the Housing Act 1996
- 2 Whether the Council failed to consider section 191(2) regarding relevant facts and good faith
- 3 Whether the review procedure complied with statutory and regulatory requirements
Ratio Decidendi
Section 191(2) did not apply because the appellant's belief in finding work and accommodation in the UK was not a sufficiently specific relevant fact; it was an aspiration rather than a fact based on genuine investigation. The Council and Review Panel did not err in law by failing to apply section 191(2).
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Respondent's legally aided costs to be subject to detailed assessment
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