header-logo header-logo

Housing

28 April 2011
Issue: 7463 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Akhtar v Birmingham City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 383, [2011] All ER (D) 111 (Apr)

The issue before the court was whether, notwithstanding the absence of any express statutory requirement to do so, a local housing authority had to, when it made an offer of accommodation pursuant to its duty under s 193(2) of the Housing Act 1996, state its reasons for considering the property to be suitable and that it was reasonable for the applicant to accept it, and had to, when it decided a review under ss 202 and 203 of the Act in favour of the applicant, state its reasons for its decision. It was held that s 203(4)(b) did not require reasons to be given in such a situation as the instant.

Confirmation of the original decision on any issue within s 203(4)(b) referred to the resolution of a review against the applicant. It did not refer to the confirmation of a decision which played no part in the resolution of the review in favour of the applicant. In the case of the suitability of

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll