Permission to appeal was granted by the Court of Appeal at an oral hearing on 21st January 2015 to appeal against the decision of His Honour Judge Worster dismissing an appeal under Section 204 Housing Act 1996 from a decision by Birmingham City Council that Ms Samuels was intentionally homeless due to rent arrears.

Terryann Samuels –v-Birmingham City Council (2015)

Ms Samuels had to find a shortfall of over £150 a month between her contractual rent and housing benefit and was entirely reliant on benefits for her subsistence income.

Permission was granted on three grounds that (1) the authority had erred in law in its approach to affordability, (2) that the county court judge had wrongly relied on an e-mail from the reviewing officer produced at the hearing which for the first time set out the number of children that it he had taken into account in considering the size of her family and (3) on the basis that inadequate reasons were given both to explain how the accommodation was affordable and what expenditure was said to be excessive when the applicant was entirely reliant on state benefits.

In particular, permission was granted in the latter case on the basis that the judge may have confused himself as to the meaning and effect of the dictum of Lord Neuberger in  Holmes-Moorhouse -v- Richmond LBC  .

James Stark  of GCN, instructed by Mike McIlvaney of the  Community Law Partnership  , represents Ms Samuels. 

Related Barristers