header-logo header-logo

Housing

30 January 2015
Issue: 7638 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Hussain v Waltham Forest London Borough [2015] EWCA Civ 14, [2015] All ER (D) 128 (Jan)

The local authority had refused a resident’s application for housing on the basis that she was not homeless as, while she had suffered obvious emotional and other upset, her neighbour’s misbehaviour and harassment fell short of actual violence or threats of violence that were likely to be carried out and it would not be unreasonable for her to continue to occupy the property in which she lived. The county court judge quashed the authority’s decision. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the phrase "other violence" in s 177(1) of the Housing Act 1996 covered not only physical violence (actual or threatened) but other threatening or intimidating behaviour or abuse, if of such seriousness that it might give rise to psychological harm. The authority’s appeal was dismissed with the result that it had to reconsider its decision.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll