header-logo header-logo

12 February 2009 / Peter Hungerford-welch
Issue: 7356 / Categories:
printer mail-detail

Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond upon Thames LBC [2009] UKHL 7

Peter Hungerford-Welch, associate dean, The City Law School, City University London. W www.city.ac.uk/law

When a court in family proceedings makes a shared residence order and one parent is homeless, a housing authority was not obliged, on account of the order, to regard that parent as a person in priority need of accommodation on the ground that dependent children might reasonably expected to reside with him. Moreover, a family court should not use a residence order as a means of putting pressure upon a local housing authority to allocate its resources in a particular way.

Issue: 7356 / Categories:
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

DAC Beachcroft—Kirstie Pike & Simy Khanna

DAC Beachcroft—Kirstie Pike & Simy Khanna

DAC Beachcroft further builds national Professional Liability practice, hiring two partners in Bristol

NEWS
A child’s views can be taken into account during international child abduction proceedings, the Supreme Court has held
Small and medium-sized law firms have urged regulators to pause plans to exclude owner-managers from compliance officer roles
Lawyers have raised the alarm on employment tribunal delays and backlogs, with some cases facing a three-year wait for a hearing
The controversial assisted dying Bill has drawn to a halt after MPs defeated it by 286 votes to 270
MPs have called for legislation to protect against the human rights risks of artificial intelligence (AI)
back-to-top-scroll