CHAPTER 20
Housing and community care
20.3Housing provision under the Care Act 2014 20.16Housing provision under the Housing Acts Housing allocations under the Housing Act 1996 Assistance for homeless persons under the Housing Act 1996
20.27Accommodation through the Local Government Act 2000 and/or the Localism Act 2011 and/or special purpose vehicles Cases
20.33R v Bristol CC ex p Penfold (1997–8) 1 CCLR 315, QBD A mentally unwell single parent who had become intentionally homeless might need accommodation in order to meet her need for care
20.34R v Wigan MBC ex p Tammadge (1997–8) 1 CCLR 581, QBD A local authority was under a duty to meet a family’s need for larger, adapted accommodation under care legislation, having assessed a need as existing for such provision under that legislation
20.35Marzari v Italy Application no 36448/97, (2000) 30 EHRR CD 218 A positive duty could arise under the ECHR to provide housing assistance to a seriously disabled person, if the consequences were sufficiently severe
20.36R (Patrick) v Newham LBC (2001) 4 CCLR 48, QBD Referring a homeless woman with care needs to a housing charity did not amount to a discharge of the duty to assess or meet her needs
20.37R (Wahid) v Tower Hamlets LBC [2002] EWCA Civ 287, (2002) 5 CCLR 239 Local authorities are only required to provide accommodation under social care legislation when the qualifying criteria under such legislation are met
20.38R (Bernard) v Enfield LBC [2002] EWHC 2282 (Admin), (2002) 5 CCLR 577 A serious failure to provide the services required under section 21 of the National Assistance Act 1948, which had severe repercussion on Ms Bernard’s family and private law, breached Article 8 ECHR
20.39R (Morris) v Westminster CC [2005] EWCA Civ 1184, [2006] 1 WLR 505 The exclusion of a British parent from homelessness assistance, because her child was subject to immigration control, was incompatible with Articles 8 and 14 ECHR
20.40R (Limbuela) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 66, (2006) 9 CCLR 30 It was necessary to provide accommodation and support to asylum-seekers who were destitute or faced imminent destitution, to avoid a breach of Article 3 ECHR
20.41R (Mooney) v Southwark LBC [2006] EWHC 1912 (Admin), (2006) 9 CCLR 670 Care assessments had not identified a care need requiring the provision of accommodation: this was a housing case only
20.42Barber v Croydon LBC [2010] EWCA Civ 51, [2010] HLR 26 It was unlawful to seek to evict a vulnerable person incompatibly with the local authority’s own policy on dealing with anti-social behaviour committed by vulnerable persons and irrational
20.43Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45, [2011] 2 AC 104 It can be disproportionate, in breach of Article 8 ECHR, to order a person to give up possession of their home, but the rights of the public landowner will almost always prevail
20.43.1Pieretti v Enfield LBC [2010] EWCA Civ 1104, (2010) 13 CCLR 650 The disability equality duty applied to all local authority functions, including under sections 184 and 202 of the Housing Act 1996
20.44Bah v United Kingdom Application no 56328/07, (2012) 54 EHRR 21 States were entitled to treat persons differently, for the purposes of housing assistance, on the basis of their or their dependants’ immigration status and States enjoyed a wide margin of appreciation in that respect
20.45R (SL) v Westminster CC [2013] UKSC 27, (2013) 16 CCLR 161 A need for ‘care and attention’ was a need for more than accommodation and monitoring
20.46Hotak, Kanu and Johnson v Southwark LBC and Solihull MBC [2015] UKSC 30, [2015] 2 WLR 1341 A homeless person is in priority need if he or she is vulnerable compared with the average person not the average homeless person
20.47Nzolameso v City of Westminster [2015] UKSC 22, (2015) 18 CCLR 201 Housing authorities had to consider their duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children when assessing what accommodation would be suitable for a homeless family
20.48Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd [2015] UKSC 15, [2015] AC 1399 The court should not ordinarily determine summarily a possession claim defendant on disability discrimination grounds that appeared to be substantial because, unlike defences under the ECHR, it was not the case that a tenant’s rights under the Equality Act 2010 would almost always be outweighed by the landlord’s property rights
20.49R (SG) v Haringey LBC [2015] EWHC 2579 (Admin), (2015) 18 CCLR 444 A local authority need only provide accommodation under the Care Act 2014 in response to an accommodation-related need
20.50R (H) v Ealing LBC [2016] EWHC 841 Admin, [2016] HLR 20 A Housing Allocation Scheme must not be discriminatory or breach the PSED
20.50.1Birmingham CC v Wilson [2016] EWCA Civ 1137 Although a housing authority was required to enquire into whether there was a real possibility that a homeless household included a person with a disability, relevant to the homeless assessment, that duty was no more than a duty of Wednesbury rational enquiry
20.50.2Watts v Stewart [2016] EWCA Civ 1247 It was not incompatible with Articles 8 and 14 ECHR that licensees of almshouses did not have security of tenure
20.50.3Hackney LBC v Haque [2017] EWCA Civ 4 In deciding whether or not accommodation provided to a disabled homeless man was suitable, the authority was not required to spell out whether he had a protected characteristic and the effect of the PSED