Summary

In one case, the High Court held that a child in need assessment was unlawful because it failed to take into account that a parent who had overstayed her visa was unlikely to be able lawfully to rent accommodation for herself and her two children because of the 'right to rent' provisions of the Immigration Act 2014. The court rejected the authority's suggestion that the applicant could avoid the right to rent provisions by paying for hotel accommodation, explaining that a person whose occupation amounts to living in a hotel will be 'captured' by the restrictions. The alternative of a series of short-term hotel lets would be disruptive to the children, and therefore detrimental to their welfare.

This is from Shelter 

Law Reports

Bailii

Articles About The Case