Alemi, R (on the application of) v Westminster City Council

Alemi, R (on the application of) v Westminster City Council

The Defendant's Scheme unlawfully excludes a sub-group of unintentionally homeless applicants from reasonable preference in the allocation of social housing for 12 months, contrary to section 166A(3) of the Housing Act 1996, as the exclusion is not based on allocation-related features but an arbitrary time bar.

Parties
Claimant: Hakima Alemi; Defendant: Westminster City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Housing Allocation Schemes, Reasonable Preference, Homelessness, Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Housing Law Housing Allocation Schemes Reasonable Preference Homelessness Statutory Interpretation

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hakima Alemi

Claimant

Westminster City Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Westminster City Council's Housing Allocation Scheme unlawfully breaches section 166A(3) of the Housing Act 1996 by suspending unintentionally homeless applicants from bidding for social housing for 12 months

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant's Scheme unlawfully excludes a sub-group of unintentionally homeless applicants from reasonable preference in the allocation of social housing for 12 months, contrary to section 166A(3) of the Housing Act 1996, as the exclusion is not based on allocation-related features but an arbitrary time bar.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that the relevant paragraphs of the Defendant’s Housing Allocation Scheme are unlawful
  • Claimant no longer suspended from bidding for social housing