Novitskaya v London Borough of Brent & Anor

Novitskaya v London Borough of Brent & Anor

A statement that reasonably indicates a claim for housing benefit, even if not explicitly named, constitutes a defective claim under regulation 72, and defects can be cured by subsequent submission of a completed form within the prescribed period.

Parties
Appellant: Irina Novitskaya; 1st Respondent: The London Borough of Brent; 2nd Respondent/interested Party: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Housing Benefit Claims, Defective Claims, Interpretation of Social Security Regulations

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Irina Novitskaya

Appellant

The London Borough of Brent

1st Respondent

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

2nd Respondent/interested Party

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether a claim for housing benefit requires explicit wording identifying the benefit
  2. 2 Whether the 10 June statement constituted a defective claim under the Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987
  3. 3 Whether defects in a claim can be cured by subsequent submission of a completed form

Ratio Decidendi

A statement that reasonably indicates a claim for housing benefit, even if not explicitly named, constitutes a defective claim under regulation 72, and defects can be cured by subsequent submission of a completed form within the prescribed period.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Counsel to draw up a minute of order