header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
29 January 2009 / Jamie Burton
Issue: 7354 / Categories: Features , Public , Landlord&tenant , Housing
printer mail-detail

An impartial review?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Jamie Burton outlines the route of appeal for dissatisfied council tenants

* * * * * *
In Ali v Birmingham City Council; Ibrahim v Birmingham City Council; Tomlinson v Birmingham City Council [2008] EWCA Civ 1228 two single mothers had been accepted by the council as being entitled to accommodation pursuant to Pt VII of the Housing Act 1996. However the council was entitled to treat its duty to the claimants as being discharged as they had each refused an offer of accommodation after having been warned in writing of the consequences of refusing a suitable offer of accommodation. Both claimants maintained that they did not receive the letter containing the written warning and that therefore the council remained under a duty to accommodate them.

Applicants under Pt VII are entitled to have decisions reviewed by a more senior officer. Applicants who remain dissatisfied with a decision on review may then appeal to the county court “on a point of law”, in a challenge akin to judicial review. In this case both

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll