000			02052cab a2200265 4500
001			##L134303
008			060725n2006 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u134303
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aGeoffrey Edwin Fletcher v The London Borough of Brent
260			_c2006
520			_a[2006] EWCA Civ 960, 7 July 2006. Concerns whether a former tenant was homeless within the Housing Act 1996 s175. Appeal by F against a decision that he was not homeless within s175 of the Act. F and his wife had occupied the property under a secure joint tenancy from B. F's wife left the property to reside in a refuge and F left for a period by an order made in family proceedings. After this was discharged F's wife gave notice to quit and vacated the property. F submitted a homelessness application which B refused on the basis that he had accommodation available to him at the property which was reasonable for him to occupy. A review of B's decision concluded that F was not homeless and this was upheld in the county court. "Held": appeal allowed. The review decision was legally flawed. F was not homeless if he had at the time of the review an entitlement to occupy (s175(1)(a)) or an express or implied licence to occupy (s175(1)(b)). On the evidence it was not possible to determine that F's interest under a licence (if any) meant that he was not homeless. The matter was remitted to the review officer to reconsider his decision.
590			_aIKA010806
650	2	4	_aFLETCHER V BRENT LBC
650	2	4	_aHOUSING ACT 1996 S175
650	2	4	_aNOTTING HILL HOUSING TRUST V ROOMUS
650	2	4	_aHARROW LBC V QAZI
650	2	4	_aHOUSING ACT 1996 S175 (1)(B)
650	2	4	_aHOUSING ACT 1996 S175 (1)(A)
650	2	4	_aHOUSING ACT 1996 S193
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-LICENCES TO OCCUPY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2006/960.html _zView the judgment free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c77439 _d77439