Forum Home → Discussion → Housing costs → Thread
“person affected” - Wirral MBC v Salisbury Independent Living
In the above case ((aka CH/3186/2009), the UT decided a LL was a person affected. That decision opened the door to all kinds of situations where a person would be a person affected and, in turn, entitled to challenge HB/CTB decisions.
However, permission to appeal was granted by the Upper Tribunal in May 2011. The “window” for hearing the case is currently stated as being 03-Nov-11 to 05-Mar-12.
On that basis, LAs would be within their rights to ask FtTs to stay cases where “person affected” is at issue pending the outcome of the CA case.
Update:
According to a post on hbinfo, Wirral’s appeal was successful. The only persons affected are those prescribed in regulation 3 of the Housing Benefit (Decisions & Appeals) Regulations 2001.
Update:
According to a post on hbinfo, Wirral’s appeal was successful. The only persons affected are those prescribed in regulation 3 of the Housing Benefit (Decisions & Appeals) Regulations 2001.
That was quick, the case was apparently only heard at 9:45 this morning
And hot on the heels…the transcript:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/84.html
{Edited to add} At the risk of appearing unbearably smug, the judgement more or less follows analysis that I offered on the hbinfo forum in Feb 2010. It’s nice to be right at least once. Of course, I won’t mention other judgements that have totally smashed my analysis in other cases…
[ Edited: 9 Feb 2012 at 05:27 pm by Kevin D ]see also rightsnet news story -