Imam, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Croydon [2023] UKSC 45 (28 November 2023)
Citation: Imam, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Croydon [2023] UKSC 45 (28 November 2023)
Rule of thumb: Stare-decisis: Does the 3 month deadline for finding an appropriate property for a homeless person have to be followed by a Local Council if they have nothing available? The 3 month deadline must be met – it is a breach of the law for it not to be met – if there is nothing available then local authorities must contact Central Government or come up with a creative solution, because long term-homeless & the subsequent skid-rows they create are a breach of the social security law in Britain.
Background facts: The facts of this case were that Imam was homeless. She applied to the Council and was provided with a property to rent. Imam developed disabilities and was in a wheelchair. Imam applied to the Council for improved accommodation to live in – accommodation where she had an upstairs & downstairs toilet to avoid embarrassing accidents. The Council did not have accommodation suitable for Imam within the statutory period they have to find Imam accommodation. Imam sought a declaration that the Council were in breach of their statutory duty to provide suitable accommodation.
Parties argued: Imam argued that this was simply a breach of the statute where no suitably exceptional explanation had been provided as to why the statute was not complied with.
The Council provided evidence to show that they simply & literally did not have accommodation in their area to meet Imam’s needs – they were stuck. They argued that it was implied in the statute that they had to all they reasonably could & not perform miracles, so as it was impossible to get the accommodation then they were not in breach of statute.
Court held: The Court held that the local authority had breached the law. The Court affirmed the starting point was that the Council were in black & white breach of the law. The Court confirmed that it is then up to the Council to provide exceptional circumstances as to why they were in breach of the law. The Court held that although the duty was not absolute, the Council fell well short in this instance or providing the exceptional circumstances necessary to prove they were not in breach of the law. The Council were held to have breached their duty towards Imam. The Court did hold that the case would have to be remitted to the Court to consider if there were some creative solution that could be arrived at to find a solution to the problem.
Ratio-decidendi:
1. ‘This case concerns the approach which a court should adopt to granting a mandatory order as a remedy against a local housing authority which is in breach of its statutory duty under section 193(2) of the Housing Act 1996 (“the Act”) to ensure that suitable housing is available to a person who is eligible for assistance. The appellant housing authority (“Croydon”) admits that at the material time it was in breach of this duty owed to the respondent (“Ms Imam”), but contends that by reason of severe budgetary constraints and limits to the stock of properties available for housing assistance it ought not to be ordered to provide a property to Ms Imam, suitable for her complex needs, with immediate effect. Croydon says that at the very least it should be given a period of grace to allow it to find a suitable property out of its limited resources.
2. The central issue on the appeal is whether, and if so in what way, limits on the resources of a local housing authority should affect the exercise of a court’s discretion as to the remedy to be granted when the authority is in breach of its duty under section 193(2) of the Act (“section 193(2)”).
Factual background 3. Ms Imam is an applicant to Croydon for homelessness assistance pursuant to Part 7 of the Act and for allocation of accommodation under Part 6. She is a full-time wheelchair user and the mother of three children, currently aged 17, 16 and 12.
4. Ms Imam made her application to Croydon for assistance in about February 2014. Croydon assessed her application and accepted that it owed her a duty under section 193(2).
5. In September 2014 Croydon offered Ms Imam temporary accommodation comprising a three-bedroom house (“the Property”). Ms Imam visited the Property on 29 September and accepted it that day. She moved into the Property the following month. She and her children continue to reside there. Ms Imam’s partner went to live with them there in 2017.
6. On 30 September 2014, however, Ms Imam requested a review of the suitability of the Property. On 5 June 2015 Croydon accepted that the Property was not suitable for Ms Imam, on the grounds that it lacked a level-access toilet on the first floor suitable for her to use during the night. However, Croydon did not offer Ms Imam alternative housing which was suitable.
7. Croydon accepts that from 5 June 2015 to date it has been in breach of its duty owed to Ms Imam under section 193(2) to provide her with suitable accommodation. Ms Imam maintains that the breach of this duty began at the commencement of her occupation of the Property. This point of difference as to the timing of the commencement of the breach of duty is not significant for present purposes and does not need to be resolved in this court.
8. On 5 March 2020 Ms Imam commenced the present claim for judicial review of Croydon’s conduct in relation to her. She sought a mandatory order to compel Croydon to secure suitable accommodation for occupation by her and her household (ground 1); declaratory relief and damages for breach of the Equality Act 2010 (ground 2); and an order requiring Croydon to reassess her priority on its housing register (ground 3). The present appeal concerns the claim on ground 1 and whether a mandatory order should be made. Ms Imam did not file a witness statement in support of her claim…
66. The considerations set out above indicate that ordinarily, when judging whether particular conduct is possible or impossible for an authority for the purposes of deciding how the court’s remedial discretion should be exercised, the court should refer to the authority’s position as it exists at the time of the proceedings. However, this is not an absolute rule and its application may have to be qualified in light of the specific circumstances of a particular case…
76. … Croydon admits that it has failed to comply with its duty under section 193(2) to provide Ms Imam with suitable accommodation. Subject to the points made above, she is entitled to a remedy. It is not an answer for Croydon to say that it is expensive and not cost-effective to comply with its duty. It is legally obliged to comply. In any event, Croydon has explained that Ms Imam is some way from the head of the queue for allocation of a secure tenancy under Part 6 and the facts of the case show that she has had to be accommodated at the Property for about six years. It is by no means clear that if adaptations had been made to improve the toilet facilities at the outset that these could be described as not cost-effective. Further, it is likely that Croydon will, from time to time, have to accommodate others who need wheelchair access, including to toilet facilities on the first floor, and if the adaptations are made Croydon will be able to use the Property for them when it is vacated by Ms Imam.
Conclusion: 77. For the reasons given above, I would dismiss Croydon’s appeal. I would, however, also reject part of the submissions made on behalf of Ms Imam, to the effect that this court should depart from the approach adopted by the Court of Appeal regarding the grant of mandatory relief. It is common ground that the case should be remitted to the High Court for further consideration with fresh evidence’.
Lord Sales
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.