Case comment: London Borough of Hackney v Haque [2017] EWCA Civ 4

This post provides commentary to an important recent housing case.

In LB Hackney v Haque [2017] EWCA Civ 4, the Court of Appeal was asked to decide on the extent of the duties imposed by s.149 Equality Act 2010 (the ‘public sector equality duty’, or PSED) with regards to reviews conducted under the Housing Act 1996 into the suitability of accommodation offered to homeless persons.

The full judgment is available here. Numbers in square brackets refer to paragraphs in the judgment as it appears on BAILII. Continue reading

Case comment: the bedroom tax in the Supreme Court

high_court_1370274cOn 9th November 2016 the Supreme Court handed down judgment in four related appeals, challenging the discriminatory impact of the bedroom tax – sometimes referred to as ‘removal of the spare room subsidy’. Six of the cases were related to the impact on people with disabilities. The other case concerned the impact of the bedroom tax on a victim of domestic violence.

Continue reading

Advice for Daniel Blake

i-daniel-blake-1200x600-c-defaultSPOILER ALERT: this post refers to the plot of the film frequently, including the ending.

This article was originally published in and edited form in the Guardian

Ken Loach’s brilliant new film, I, Daniel Blake, was released in UK in October. The Z2K team went see it together last week, and like many others, were deeply moved by the way that it portrays the day-to-day reality of poverty and trying to access welfare benefits.

The purpose of this post is to show the kind of advice that Z2K would give to someone facing the situations of the two main characters in the film – Daniel and Katie. Both characters are typical of the kind of clients that Z2K assists with welfare benefits and housing issues. Continue reading

Case comment: McDonald v McDonald & Ors [2016] UKSC 28


landlord-eviction-rightsThis post, a collaborative effort by Matthew Ahluwalia and Thomas Phillips (one of Z2K’s volunteers), examines a recent judgment of the Supreme Court in an important housing case.



The case addressed a significant question: namely, whether possession proceedings brought by a private landlord against a resident tenant engage the tenant’s right to a private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Continue reading