Genevieve Screeche-Powell led by Kelvin Rutledge KC acted for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets to successfully resist an appeal about the local authority’s use of a database of homeless applicants awaiting transfer to alternative temporary accommodation.
The appellant, Ms Begum claimed that the system of allocating temporary accommodation indirectly discriminated against women because more women than men are housed in temporary accommodation.
The housing and homelessness charity Shelter was joined as an intervenor to the proceedings.
Court of Appeal judgment in R (Begum) v LB Tower Hamlets [2025] EWCA Civ 1049
Neither a database logging the details of homeless applicants requiring a move to suitable accommodation, nor the system within which it operated, discriminated indirectly against women or otherwise breached the public sector equality duty (PSED) merely because applicants on the database were statistically more likely to be women than men.
The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s decision to dismiss Ms Begum’s claim that the way in which the local authority had treated her homelessness application breached section 19 and section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.
Maintaining a database of homeless applicants
The database is one way in which the local authority is seeking to combat the severe shortage of suitable temporary accommodation.
Where an applicant owed a housing duty needs to move to suitable accommodation (in Ms Begum’s case because of the natural growth of the family), their details are put on the database which records, among other things, household composition, medical recommendations, maximum floor height, area and so on, but not the applicant’s gender.
When a property becomes or would shortly become available, the database enables housing officers to shortlist suitable households swiftly and efficiently and decide from the identified group which household provides the best match.
Waiting time on the database is only considered in the unlikely event of a tie-break between 2 or more evenly matched households.
The Court of Appeal accepted the local authority’s submission that the database was not a deferral list or a means of delaying performance of the housing duty.
Its purpose, as the High Court had found, was the “exact opposite”.
The advantages of the database are speed, efficiency, consistency and transparency in shortlisting households. Additionally it helps reduce void time and spotlights where demand for accommodation type is the greatest, driving procurement in the same direction.
Useful guidance for housing lawyers about application of s.19 Equality Act
The Court of Appeal’s judgment contains helpful analyses of section 19 Equality Act. It discusses:
- what constitutes a provision, criterion of practice (PCP)
- the correct comparator group and the importance of causation and,
- as regards the PSED, demonstrates the correct approach to be adopted where the equality considerations and functions being performed substantially overlap.
Read the full judgment in Begum, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2025] EWCA Civ 1049