- Cited — Lemari Minott v Cambridge City Council 2022-02-18
“…Sections 10.5 and 10.6 of the 2018 Code accurately reflects the decision of the House of Lords in Mohamed v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC[2001] UKHL 57, which held that interim accommodation provided by an LHA could, as matter of law, constitute an applicant’s normal residence for the purposes of s.199(1)(a): …”
- Cited — London Borough of Bromley v Broderick 2020-11-16
“… original decision was taken. That can be seen from, for example, the decision of the House of Lords in Mohamed v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council [2001] UKHL 57, [2002] 1 AC 547 and, more recently, that of the Court of Appeal in Waltham Forest London Borough Council v Saleh. In the latter case, an individual who had ac…”
- Cited — LB v London Borough of Tower Hamlets 2020-03-24
“…efore that date and matters thereafter up to the date of the review. That seems to me to be the thrust of the decision in Mohammed v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC [2001] UKHL 57.…”
- Cited — London Borough of Waltham Forest v Saleh 2019-11-19
“…The reviewer is required to reach his decision by reference to the state of affairs at the date of his decision: see Mohamed v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC [2001] UKHL 57; [2002] 1 A.C. 547; Banks v Kingston upon Thames RLBC [2008] EWCA Civ 1443; [2009] H.L.R. 29; NJ v Wandsworth LBC [2013] EWCA Civ 1373; [2014] H.L.R. 6. There …”
- Cited — London Borough of Waltham Forest v Saleh 2019-11-19
“…y on review is what duty (if any) “is” owed to the applicant under Pt 7. Secondly, binding case law is to the contrary. In Mohamed v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC [2001] UKHL 57; [2002] 1 A.C. 547 the House of Lords held that events subsequent to the application could be taken into account on the review. As Lord Slynn put it the decisi…”