- Supreme Court guidance on affordable rent and intentional homelessness (Samuels v Birmingham City Council)
- What are the practical implications of the judgment?
- What was the background?
- What did the Supreme Court decide?
Local Government analysis: Shu Shin Luh and Connor Johnston, barristers at Garden Court Chambers, examine the Supreme Court’s decision in Samuels v Birmingham City Council to quash the respondent local authority’s finding that the appellant’s rented accommodation had been affordable and therefore when she had fallen into rent arrears and been given notice to leave, she had become intentionally homeless and could not require it to find accommodation for her.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial