R (Poshteh) v Kensington and Chelsea RLBC
[2017] UKSC 36
Independent editorial summary — not the official judgment. Read the full judgment via the source link.
Ratio Decidendi
Whether a person is vulnerable for the purposes of priority need under the homelessness legislation requires comparison with an ordinary person if made homeless, not with an ordinary person generally.
Facts
An asylum seeker with mental health difficulties was refused priority need status. The authority compared his vulnerability to that of an ordinary person, not an ordinary homeless person.
Judgment Summary
The Supreme Court clarified the comparator for assessing vulnerability under s.189(1)(c) Housing Act 1996: the question is whether the applicant would be significantly more vulnerable than an ordinary person who is homeless.
Key Quotes
"The comparison should be with an ordinary person if made homeless, not with an ordinary person."
— Lord Neuberger
Subsequent Treatment
Applied in all subsequent vulnerability assessments under homelessness legislation.
What To Do Next
Get Professional Help