Issue 14 - 1st May 2006

Sunday 14 May 2006

Share This Page

Email This Page

Government and legislation

On 6 April 2006 amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules extended the normal time limit for making an appeal in a civil case from 14 to 21 days and amended the test on whether permission to appeal should be granted to reflect “proportionality”: see the amended CPR 52 at

On 11 April 2006 the Introductory Tenancy (Review of Decisions to Extend a Trial Period)(England) Regulations 2006 were made. They deal with the right of review available where a social landlord decides to extend an introductory tenancy from 12 to 18 months. The commencement date is 3 May 2006. See

On 12 April 2006 The Minister for Housing (Yvette Cooper MP) wrote to all local authorities to express her concern about reports of “bad practice by a handful of authorities” who had interpreted the Government’s homelessness prevention strategy as requiring a “gate-keeping” approach. The letter criticises those cases in which private tenants have been given notice to leave but have been told they cannot be helped until actually evicted. The letter is at

On 12 April the ODPM published a draft Respect Standard for Housing Management dealing with requirements on social landlords to tackle anti-social behaviour. Consultation closes on 21 June 2006.

The document is at:

On 20 April 2006 the Eligibility Rules for homelessness and allocations were amended to reverse the decision in Barnet LBC v Abdi & Ismail (see Housing Law Bulletin 13): Further amendments can be expected as a result of the  Immigration (European Economic Area) Regs coming into force on 30 April  2006.


Slater v Lewisham LBC [2006] 12 April, CA [2006] EWCA Civ 394.  Ms Slater was homeless and was owed the main housing duty. But she refused an offer of accommodation on the grounds that she feared her violent partner might trace her if she were housed in that area. The council decided that the offer had been “suitable” and had discharged its duty. Ms Slater succeeded on an appeal to the county court because the reviewing officer had not addressed the question of whether it was “reasonable for her to accept the offer” (Housing Act 1996 s193(7F)). The Court of Appeal upheld that decision and the judge’s order (which effectively required another offer to be made).

Judgment at:

Anne Cafferkey: Housing Law Update New Law Journal 7 April 2006 p596
Martin Iller: Leeds CC v Price Solicitors Journal 14 April 2006 p464

Garden Court Chambers Seminars
24 May 2006 - Housing Allocations
5 July 2006 - Recent developments in disrepair

Other notable dates:

24 May 2006 Housing Law: Practical Introduction

14 June 200 Defending possession proceedings, Both from LAG training: for more info

16 May Housing Law: The Update CIH training:

17 May Possession Prevention Project Conference. Email:

25 May Housing Allocations & Homelessness Jordans training:

We are top ranked by independent legal directories and consistently win awards.

+ View more awards