Katie-Leigh Webb-Harnden v London Borough of Waltham Forest
[2023] EWCA Civ 992
Rabah Ghaoui v London Borough of Waltham Forest
24 April 2024
[2024] EWCA Civ 405
Court of Appeal
A family needed housing and wanted to be near their children's religious school. The council offered a home further away. The court said the council had to consider the family's religious freedom but didn't have to put their school choice above everything else when choosing where to house them. The council's decision was fair.
Key Facts
- •Mr. Rabah Ghaoui, a married man with two young children, was evicted and applied to the London Borough of Waltham Forest for housing assistance.
- •The council offered temporary accommodation in Harlow, 20 miles from their previous address and the children's Islamic school.
- •Mr. Ghaoui appealed, arguing the council failed to consider his human rights (Article 9 ECHR) regarding his children's religious education.
- •The council argued it had no duty to prioritize religious school proximity in housing allocation.
Legal Principles
Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 mandates that offered accommodation be suitable; local authorities must consider the suitability of offered accommodation, having regard to the welfare of children (Children Act 2004).
Housing Act 1996, Part VII; Children Act 2004, section 11
Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 prohibits public authorities from acting incompatibly with Convention rights. Article 9 protects freedom of religion, and Article 2 of Protocol 1 protects the right to education, with parental choice in religious and philosophical convictions.
Human Rights Act 1998, section 6; Article 9 and Article 2 of Protocol 1 ECHR
Homelessness Code of Guidance requires authorities to consider human rights implications of their actions. However, the focus is on the outcome, not the process of decision-making (per Denbigh).
Homelessness Code of Guidance, paragraphs 1.20, 1.28; R (SB) v Governors of Denbigh High School [2006] UKHL 15
In homelessness cases, suitability assessments require identifying relevant factors and weighing them appropriately, guided by legislation and guidance. The process is practical, not purely legal.
Various case law referenced throughout judgment
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The court found no error of law in the review decision. The council was not obligated to prioritize the appellant's religiously motivated school choice in housing allocation. While the council must consider human rights, this doesn't create a positive obligation to prioritize religious school proximity.
Similar Cases
Sahra Moge v London Brough of Ealing
[2023] EWCA Civ 464
Nadia Zaman v London Borough Of Waltham Forest
[2023] EWCA Civ 322
Marcio Gomes, R (on the application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
[2023] EWHC 778 (Admin)
Amina Ahamed, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Haringey
[2023] EWCA Civ 975