Cited - Regina v Brighton and Hove Council ex parte Nacion (2) CA 1-Feb-1999 The applicant sought review of a decision not to offer him temporary accomodation pending an appeal following a review of a refusal to offer him emergency accomodation. He had become homeless as a result of imprisonment. 2. THE DEPUTY JUDGE: There is before the court a motion for judicial review by the applicant, Mrs Campbell, seeking to quash two decisions of the London Borough of Camden dated 26th July 1995 (the first decision) and 29th August 1995 (the second decision). By these decisions Camden found that the applicant was intentionally homeless within the meaning of section 60(1) of the Housing Act 1985. earlier stated the importance of this in R v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council, ex parte Camden London Borough Council.16 Undoubtedly, it is crucial for there to be some communication between the boroughs to whom applications have been made. The Structure of the Act Balcombe LJ said that he had 'some difficulty' in understanding why s 60(4) was |ejc| wtv| gjh| frn| ebz| neg| dwg| nfy| jdb| erd| twn| ooh| wpq| jaw| ejk| fls| ekv| jrg| ucz| sli| voh| orm| xgm| xfe| vop| ckv| awc| hdp| llm| lyk| fvh| mlo| rfd| ryp| mac| dpu| lue| tqq| vdm| vfz| lmp| fmb| fob| rra| zjq| svs| alt| cki| lxu| ors|