*/
Housing – Homeless person. The appellant had applied to the respondent local authority for homeless assistance under the Housing Act 1996. The authority accepted that he met all of the criteria other than a connection with the local area, as he had more of a connection with Eastbourne and referred the application accordingly. Eastbourne accepted that it had a housing duty towards him, but the appellant never applied to that authority for assistance. The respondent authority rejected the appellant's applications as the appellant was not homeless as accommodation was available to him in Eastbourne if he applied for it. The appellant's appeals were refused. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the fact that an applicant might be offered accommodation by another authority which might satisfy s 175(3) of the Act did not entitle the decision maker, per se, to find that an applicant was not homeless and that, accordingly, the qualifications for homelessness contained in s 175(1) were not satisfied. The court found that the judge below had erred but, remaking the decision for itself, held that the appellant had been homeless but that, in the circumstances, the authority had no longer owed any housing duty to him.
Housing – Homeless person. The appellant had applied to the respondent local authority for homeless assistance under the Housing Act 1996. The authority accepted that he met all of the criteria other than a connection with the local area, as he had more of a connection with Eastbourne and referred the application accordingly. Eastbourne accepted that it had a housing duty towards him, but the appellant never applied to that authority for assistance. The respondent authority rejected the appellant's applications as the appellant was not homeless as accommodation was available to him in Eastbourne if he applied for it. The appellant's appeals were refused. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the fact that an applicant might be offered accommodation by another authority which might satisfy s 175(3) of the Act did not entitle the decision maker, per se, to find that an applicant was not homeless and that, accordingly, the qualifications for homelessness contained in s 175(1) were not satisfied. The court found that the judge below had erred but, remaking the decision for itself, held that the appellant had been homeless but that, in the circumstances, the authority had no longer owed any housing duty to him.
Barbara Mills KC, the new Chair of the Bar, outlines some key themes and priorities
Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management highlights some of the ways you can cut your IHT bill
Rachel Davenport breaks down everything you need to know about AlphaBiolabs’ industry-leading laboratory testing services for legal matters
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management sets out the key steps to your dream property
A centre of excellence for youth justice, the Youth Justice Legal Centre provides specialist training, an advice line and a membership programme
By Kem Kemal of Henry Dannell
Barbara Mills KC wants to raise the profile of the family Bar. She also wants to improve wellbeing and enhance equality, diversity and inclusion in the profession. She talks to Joshua Rozenberg KC (hon) about her plans for the year ahead
Professor Dominic Regan and Seán Jones KC identify good value bottles across the price spectrum – from festive fizz to reliable reds
Reviews by Daniel Barnett
Governments who play fast and loose with the law get into real trouble, says the new Attorney General. The Rt Hon Lord Hermer KC talks to Anthony Inglese CB about what drew this boy from Cardiff to the Bar, bringing the barrister ethos to the front bench, and how he will be measuring success
Mark Neale, Director General of the Bar Standards Board, offers an update on the Equality Rules consultation
ff68877c-4b42-4825-a177-8ca60fa46c1f.tmb-carlisting.jpg?sfvrsn=a20f5111_1){kind=logo}
