Michala Hodge v Folkestone and Hythe District Council
[2023] EWCA Civ 896
Joseph Kyle v Coventry City Council
20 November 2023
[2023] EWCA Civ 1360
Court of Appeal
Mr. Kyle was evicted from his temporary housing and claimed he wasn't intentionally homeless because the place wasn't good enough. The court said his housing *was* good enough to be considered 'reasonable', so he *was* intentionally homeless because he caused his own eviction.
Key Facts
- •Mr. Kyle, a recovering drug addict, was provided temporary accommodation by Coventry City Council.
- •He was evicted from the accommodation at 79 St Margaret Road due to anti-social behavior (breaking into and stealing from other rooms).
- •The Council deemed Mr. Kyle intentionally homeless.
- •Mr. Kyle appealed the decision, arguing the accommodation was not reasonable to continue occupying.
- •The accommodation was a multi-occupancy house for recovering addicts, providing support and advice.
Legal Principles
A person becomes intentionally homeless if they deliberately do or fail to do anything in consequence of which they cease to occupy accommodation which is available for their occupation and which it would have been reasonable for them to continue to occupy.
Section 191(1) of the Housing Act 1996
A person shall not be treated as having accommodation unless it is accommodation which it would be reasonable for him to continue to occupy.
Section 175(3) of the Housing Act 1996
Reasonableness of continued occupation considers various factors, including physical characteristics, restrictions on use, potential duration of stay, affordability, violence, abuse, and threats.
Aweys/Moran [2009] UKHL 36 and Court of Appeal judgment
A benevolent approach should be adopted to the interpretation of review decisions; the court should not take too technical a view of the language used, or search for inconsistencies, or adopt a nit-picking approach.
Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond upon Thames London Borough Council [2009] UKHL 7
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr. Kyle's appeal.
The Court found that the accommodation at 79 St Margaret Road was reasonable for Mr. Kyle to continue to occupy, considering its nature, duration of his stay, and the prospect of alternative accommodation. The Court distinguished this from the refuge in Aweys/Moran, emphasizing the differences in the nature and restrictions of the accommodation.
Similar Cases
Amina Ahamed, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Haringey
[2023] EWCA Civ 975
Katie-Leigh Webb-Harnden v London Borough of Waltham Forest
[2023] EWCA Civ 992
Comte Leaf Saint Sepulchre, R (on the application of) v The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea
[2023] EWHC 2913 (Admin)
Sahra Moge v London Brough of Ealing
[2023] EWCA Civ 464