Homelessness - priority need - critical test of vulnerability

Griffin v Westminster City Council; CA (Lords Justice Kennedy, Clarke and Jacob); 28 January 2004

The applicant appealed to the housing authority review officer against the refusal of the council to provide him an accom-modation as a homeless person in priority need on the ground of his ill-health induced by excessive drinking.

The review officer held that the applicant was not vulnerable 'as a result of his age or illness to fend for himself than an ordinary homeless person so that he will or would not suffer injury or detriment in the circumstances' and rejected his appeal.

The applicant appealed.

Clive Hugh Jones (instructed by Director of Legal and Administrative Services) for Westminster City Council; Martin Russell (instructed by Moss Beachley Mullem & Coleman) for the claimant.

Held, dismissing the appeal, that the critical test as to priority need was the 'will' or 'would' suffer test and not the 'would be likely to suffer' test under the ministerial Code of Guidance for Local Authorities on Homelessness, which was published on 8 July 2002; that the ministerial code of guidance for the application of the correct test was for guidance purposes only, and where the words used in it differed from the words used to interpret 'vulnerability' by the court prior to the issue of the guidance to give effect to a statutory provision, the court would not apply or adopt the words used in the guidance.