The rights of local authorities to withdraw temporary housing from those who claim that they are homeless and have priority have been examined by the Court of Appeal.
The court has ruled that, having reviewed and backed an earlier decision to reject his application, Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council were entitled to refuse to continue to provide interim accommodation for one such applicant, Mr Francis.
Francis claimed that the council should have continued to house him pending his appeal to the county court against their stance. He appealed to Wandsworth County Court against the council’s refusal to continue to house him pending his appeal.
The county court dismissed his challenge and the Court of Appeal has upheld that decision.
In the Court of Appeal, Nicholas Grundy, counsel for Francis, argued that the county court had been wrong in refusing to order the council to extend their provision of accommodation.
Dismissing the challenge, the Court of Appeal held that, under the provisions of the Housing Act 1996, the county court had to decide the prima facie strength of the case that the council had been correct in their stance. The court found that, in this case, the county court judge had been entirely correct in his approach and that his decision was unimpugnable.
Francis v Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council Court of Appeal (Simon Brown and Rix LJJ) 19 March 2003.
References: PLS News 24/03/03
