The judge made findings of the parents’ collusion and that there was a real possibility they had overlaid the child causing an asphyxial event.
This week has already seen two important developments for social housing practitioners: the laying before parliament of regulations dealing with, inter alia, the suspension of evictions from residential tenancies and the publication of the long-awaited Social Housing White Paper.
The Court of Appeal’s judgment this week in Sharif v Birmingham City Council upholds the right of local authorities to obtain injunctions using their broad, general power to issue legal proceedings under section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972.
Today, the Civil Procedure (Amendment No.6) Rules 2020 (SI No. 1228) have been laid before Parliament. They are due to come into effect on Wednesday 2 December 2020.
The Court of Appeal has held that the parties in a homelessness review can agree an extension of time for the local authority to reach its review decision without them having to reach agreement as to a specific date by which a decision will be reached.
The Court of Appeal judgment in Prempeh v Lakhany considered 2 issues that have been raised against landlords recently in respect of s.8, Housing Act 1988 notices.
A father’s unsuccessful application to transfer the welfare stage of care proceedings to Romania.
When a tenant dies, the contractual tenancy survives, meaning possession of the property cannot be obtained from the (non-succeeding) current residents until that tenancy is terminated by notice to quit. But how is that process carried out if probate (or letters of administration) have not yet been granted?
Housing lawyers and professionals will find the judgment important because of the Supreme Court’s finding that a housing association is entitled to reserve its housing stock for people sharing a protected characteristic without necessarily thereby committing unlawful direct discrimination.
Application by the Official Solicitor on behalf of the protected party [PP] to commit the respondent for contempt of court, where the allegation was that the respondent had falsified a court order.