header-logo header-logo

10 July 2015
Issue: 7660 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Housing

​R (on the application of Alemi) v Westminster City Council [2015] EWHC 1765 (Admin), [2015] All ER (D) 247 (Jun)

The claimant challenged the defendant local housing authority’s housing allocation scheme on the basis that it unlawfully suspended an applicant’s ability to bid for social housing until 12 months had elapsed following acceptance as an unintentionally homeless eligible person in priority need. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that the differentiation permitted by the Housing Act 1996 was restricted to adjusting the relative priority of sub-groups by reference to features which afforded them some opportunity to be allocated social housing, however remote that possibility might be. The authority’s scheme afforded the claimant no preference.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll