Amin v Birmingham City Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE TUCKEY |
| Judgment Date | 11 July 2006 |
| Neutral Citation | [2006] EWCA Civ 1059 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 11 July 2006 |
| Docket Number | C6/2006/0969 |
[2006] EWCA Civ 1059
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM BIRMINGHAM CIVIL JUSTICE CENTRE
(HER HONOUR JUDGE SWINDELLS QC)
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London, WC2
Lord Justice Tuckey
C6/2006/0969
MR A.M. WILLIAMS (instructed by Aston Legal Centre, 29 Trinity Road, Aston, BIRMINGHAM, B6 6AJ) , appeared on behalf of the Appellant
THE RESPONDENT DID NOT APPEAR AND WAS NOT REPRESENTED.
Judgement
This is a renewed application for permission to appeal by Najma Amin from the decision of HHJ Swindells QC dismissing her statutory appeal under section 204 part VII of the Housing Act 1996.
The respondent council accepted that it owed a duty to secure accommodation for the applicant and her three children under the provisions of section 193(2) of the Act. On 25 August 2005 it wrote offering her accommodation under an introductory tenancy. The letter says that it is the council's policy to make one permanent offer of suitable accommodation and continued:
"The council is satisfied that this accommodation is suitable for the needs of you and your family and that it would be reasonable for you to accept it. I must warn you that if you decide to refuse this offer without good reason to do so, the Council will consider that it has discharged its duty to you under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 and that accordingly no further offers of accommodation will be made."
The applicant refused this offer but it was contended on her behalf that the council's duty had not ceased because section 193(5) did not apply as this was an offer of permanent part VI accommodation and section 193(7) did not apply because the letter did not state, (as subsection (7A) requires) that it was a final offer for the purposes of that subsection. This is the first of the two points which arise on this application.
The applicant asked for a review of the suitability of the accommodation on 12 September 2005, having been told by the council of her right to do so in a letter dated 8 September which said:
"Under Section 202 of the Housing Act 1996, you have a right to request a review. You do not have to give a reason when requesting a review. However, it will speed up the process if you make your written representations at the time you request a review. You can also send in written representations made by other people on your behalf. The review panel will take these into account."
Regulation 6(2) of the 1999 Review Procedure Regulations applied to this review. It says:
"… the authority to whom a request for a review under section 202 has been made shall -
"(a) notify the applicant that he, or someone acting on his behalf, may make representations in writing to the authority in connection with the review; and
"(b) if they have not already done so, notify...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Omar v Birmingham City Council
...LJ was similarly untroubled when he refused permission to appeal against another decision of Her Honour Judge Swindells QC in Amin v Birmingham City Council [2006] EWCA Civ 1059. Further, there is something of a parallel between this case and Griffiths, in that each has encountered submissi......