R (Hammad) v Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council

Subject Matter

HOUSING — Homeless persons — Housing duty

[2025] EWHC 2425 (Admin), KBD

AI Summary & Issues

Content generated by AI, as supplied by Jurisage. Learn more about AI Case Summaries.

In the High Court case, Mr. Hammad challenged the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea for not securing suitable accommodation under section 193(2) of the Housing Act 1996. The Defendant admitted the breach, leading the court to grant declaratory relief. A mandatory order was issued for the Defendant to provide suitable temporary accommodation within one month. Additionally, the court ordered the Defendant to pay 50% of the Claimant's costs on account, due to the lack of a detailed costs schedule.

Issues

• Did the Defendant breach its duty under section 193(2) of the Housing Act 1996 by failing to secure suitable accommodation for the Claimant, and what relief should follow from this breach?
• Was the Defendant able to demonstrate that it had taken all reasonable steps to comply with its duty to provide suitable accommodation, and did it adequately address the Ombudsman’s findings?
• Did the court find it appropriate to grant a mandatory order for the Defendant to provide suitable temporary accommodation within a specified timeframe, given the circumstances of the Claimant's case?

Commentary

Nearly Legal
Unsuitability and a mandatory order Case comment