Shepherd v. Dundee City Council & Ors [2002] ScotCS 290 (08 November 2002)

Shepherd v. Dundee City Council & Ors [2002] ScotCS 290 (08 November 2002)

The calculation of the petitioner's housing benefit was correct under the applicable regulations. The local reference rent included elements for meals and fuel, and regulation 11(8A) required deductions for these from the maximum rent. There was no sufficient delay or acquiescence to bar the petition. The respondents' methodology and calculations were lawful and correct.

Citation
[2002] ScotCS 290
Parties
Petitioner: Roy Shepherd; First Respondent: Dundee City Council; Second Respondent: Dundee City Housing Benefit Review Board; Third Respondent: The Rent Officer, Dundee
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
08 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Outer House, Court of Session – Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition refused
Legal Topics
Housing Benefit, Statutory Interpretation, Judicial Review, Calculation of Eligible Rent, Delay and Acquiescence
Administrative Law Social Security Law Housing Benefit Statutory Interpretation Judicial Review Calculation of Eligible Rent Delay and Acquiescence

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roy Shepherd

Petitioner

Dundee City Council

First Respondent

Dundee City Housing Benefit Review Board

Second Respondent

The Rent Officer, Dundee

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Outer House, Court of Session – Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the calculation of the petitioner's housing benefit was in accordance with the Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 and related statutory instruments
  2. 2 Whether deductions for meals and fuel should have been made from the local reference rent or actual rent
  3. 3 Whether delay or acquiescence by the petitioner should bar the claim

Ratio Decidendi

The calculation of the petitioner's housing benefit was correct under the applicable regulations. The local reference rent included elements for meals and fuel, and regulation 11(8A) required deductions for these from the maximum rent. There was no sufficient delay or acquiescence to bar the petition. The respondents' methodology and calculations were lawful and correct.

Court Disposition

Petition refused

Orders

  • Sustain the first and second respondents' fifth and sixth pleas-in-law and the third respondent's fourth plea in law
  • Repel the petitioner's first to sixth pleas-in-law, the first and second respondents' first to fourth pleas-in-law and the third respondents' first to third pleas-in-law