header-logo header-logo

Where to next?

02 August 2018 / Brooke Lyne
Issue: 7804 / Categories: Features , Housing , Mental health
printer mail-detail
nlj_7804_lyne

​The law in relation to those lacking capacity has undergone radical change: is the Begum case still fit for purpose? Brooke Lyne investigates

  • Since the decision in the Begum case in 1993, there has been a huge shift in the way the law treats those lacking mental capacity.
  • In WB v W District Council the Court of Appeal was forced to consider whether the Begum principles were still relevant.

Under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 (HA 1996), local authorities have a duty to secure accommodation for those who are eligible, in priority need and not intentionally homeless. There are a number of categories of ‘priority need’ but for current purposes a person who is ‘vulnerable as a result of old age, mental illness or handicap or physical disability or other special reason’ has a priority need.

The Begum case

The starting point when considering mental capacity in homelessness law is the case of Begum (reported as R v Oldham Metropolitan Council ex parte Garlick [1993] AC 509, (1993) 25 HLR 319,

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

NLJ Career Profile: Kadie Bennett, Anthony Collins

NLJ Career Profile: Kadie Bennett, Anthony Collins

Kadie Bennett, senior associate at Anthony Collins and chair of the Resolution West Midlands Group, discusses her long-standing passion for family law and calls for unity in the profession

Osborne Clarke—Lara Burch

Osborne Clarke—Lara Burch

Firm appoints new UK senior partner for 2026

Keoghs—Louise Jackson & Katie Everson

Keoghs—Louise Jackson & Katie Everson

Healthcare and sports legal team expands in the north west

NEWS
Lawyers and users of the business and property courts are invited to share their views on disclosure, in particular the operation of PD 57AD and the use of Technology Assisted Review (TAR) and artificial intelligence (AI)
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
Ian Gascoigne of LexisNexis dissects the uneasy balance between open justice and confidentiality in England’s civil courts, in this week's NLJ. From public hearings to super-injunctions, he identifies five tiers of privacy—from fully open proceedings to entirely secret ones—showing how a patchwork of exceptions has evolved without clear design
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
back-to-top-scroll