Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Beach v South Hams District Council [2025] EWCA Civ 609 (09 May 2025)
The Court of Appeal dismissed a housing appeal, holding that a hotel room offered under the main homelessness duty was reasonable temporary accommodation and that the appellant became intentionally homeless by not occupying it.
The review officer was entitled to conclude that the accommodation at 79 St Margaret Road was reasonable for the appellant to continue to occupy, and thus he became intentionally homeless when evicted due to his own conduct. The facts were distinguishable from Aweys/Moran, and the review officer was not required to address every potential sub-issue not squarely raised in the review process.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that Sandwell Council applied the wrong homelessness test and acted unfairly in review procedures, quashing the June 2016 review decision.
Safi vThe Borough Council of Sandwell [2018] EWCA Civ 2876 (21 December 2018)
Court of Appeal held that Sandwell Council misapplied the homelessness test and breached review procedure fairness in refusing Safi’s application.
Court of Appeal held a homelessness review could not be varied to a finding of homelessness based on untested evidence; the matter had to be quashed and remitted.
Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead v Hemans [2011] EWCA Civ 374 (02 March 2011)
The Court of Appeal held that a joint homelessness application could imply Mr Hemans had a licence to occupy, but quashed the review for failing to assess reasonableness properly.
The Court of Appeal held that a homelessness review decision was legally flawed and should be quashed, but the county court should not have made a positive declaration of homelessness.
The court dismissed this housing judicial review as academic, holding that the homelessness issues were fact-sensitive and unsuitable for general guidance.
The Court of Appeal held that homelessness under section 175(3) requires considering whether it is reasonable to expect the applicant to occupy available accommodation, including personal circumstances and location.
Waltham Forest v Maloba [2007] EWCA Civ 1281 (04 December 2007)
The Court of Appeal held that homelessness under s 175(3) requires considering whether available accommodation is reasonable to occupy, including location and personal circumstances.
Explore more
