The application for housing assistance under Part VII of the 1996 Act
The application for housing assistance under Part VII of the 1996 Act
On 8 November 2022, the appellant and ED applied for housing assistance from the respondent. The respondent treated that as an application for homelessness assistance pursuant to the provisions of Part VII of the 1996 Act. The appellant and his family were initially placed in bed and breakfast accommodation between 18 November 2022 and 9 March 2023. On 17 February 2023, the respondent accepted that the appellant was owed a duty under section 193(2) of the 1996 Act (the full, or main, housing duty). In March 2023, at a time when the appellant and ED had one child, the family were moved into a one-bedroom flat pursuant to the duty under section 193(2) of the 1996 Act. In June 2023, following the birth of the appellant’s second child, the respondent determined that a one-bedroom flat was not suitable. An occupational therapy assessment dated 7 September 2023 described ED’s needs and recommended ground floor accommodation with a wet room. Following the hearing in the court below, alternative accommodation was offered.
Early this year, the appellant was offered a private sector tenancy. Acceptance of that tenancy, subject to any application for review or appeal, will bring the duty under section 193(2) to an end (section 193(7AA) of the 1996 Act). The appellant has accepted the offer of a tenancy but sought a review of the decision pursuant to section 202 of the 1996 Act.
- Heading
- LORD JUSTICE LEWIS
- THE LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
- The 2010 Act
- THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND
- The application for housing assistance under Part VII of the 1996 Act
- The allocation of Part VI accommodation
- The award of points and the review decision
- The Emergency and Exceptions Panel decision
- The Judgment
- THE ISSUES
- THE FIRST ISSUE – IS THE APPEAL ACADEMIC?
- THE SECOND AND THIRD ISSUES – INDIRECT DISCRIMINATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE 2010 ACT AND THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
- Discussion
- The comparison – is there evidence of disproportionate adverse impact?
- Is there a causal connection between the PCP and the particular disadvantage alleged?
- THE FOURTH ISSUE – THE DUTY TO MAKE REASONABLE ADJUSTMENTS
- THE FIFTH ISSUE – SECTION 149 OF THE 2010 ACT
- Submissions
- Discussion
- Conclusions
![CA-2024-002348 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1390](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_Sjvxvlx.png)