header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 October 2025 / Kelvin Rutledge KC , Genevieve Screeche-Powell
Issue: 8133 / Categories: Features , Housing , Discrimination , Local authority , Equality
printer mail-detail

No discrimination by database

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
231389
A council’s database for homeless applicants was found not to be discriminatory against women, write Kelvin Rutledge KC & Genevieve Screeche-Powell

  • Tower Hamlets Council has sought to tackle the housing crisis by using a database to help it allocate housing to homeless applicants.
  • In Anisa Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets, the appellant claimed the use of the database discriminated unlawfully against her as a woman.
  • The court accepted Tower Hamlets Council’s submission that the database was not a deferral list or otherwise a means of delaying performance of the main housing duty.

In Alibkhiet v Brent London Borough; Adam v City of Westminster [2018] EWCA Civ 2742, Lord Justice Lewison famously remarked: ‘You would need to be a hermit not to know that there is an acute shortage of housing, especially affordable housing, in London; and that local government finance is severely stretched.’ That observation is especially true of family-sized temporary accommodation, which local housing authorities frequently need to discharge their

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
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
NLJ this week: Volunteers, promotions & perilous appeals
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll