Jamie Burton (instructed by Hansen Palomares, Lambeth ) for the applicant; Annette Cafferkey and Rebecca Chan (instructed by Head of Legal Services, Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council ) for the local authority.
The applicant presented as homeless to the local housing authority and was offered accommodation. She refused the offer because she said the property exacerbated mental health problems arising from her earlier imprisonment and torture in her native Iran. The housing authority’s reviewing officer upheld the decision that the property was objectively suitable and that it was reasonable for her to accept, and the judge dismissed the applicant’s appeal from that decision. The applicant appealed.
Appeal dismissed (Elias LJ dissenting). The decision-maker had to have regard to the “subjective factors” affecting the relevant person’s attitude to the offer of accommodation and had then to take those matters into account, along with all other relevant factors, in deciding whether objectively it was reasonable for that person to accept the offer. In the present case the reviewing officer understood that objectively suitable accommodation might be unsuitable for an applicant if it caused him or her to suffer from mental illness. He then went on to consider all the available evidence on that basis. The reviewing officer reached a decision that was reasonably open to him in the light of the evidence as a whole. Further the reviewing officer clearly recognised the applicant’s disability. He conscientiously recognised the public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which applied to a housing authority when performing its functions under Part VII of the 1996 Act. He was at pains to acquire all information that appeared to him to be necessary for that purpose. In particular, he considered the important question of the likely effect of the applicant’s particular disability on whether it was reasonable for her to accept this offer of accommodation that had been made.