The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal by Wolverhampton City Council, ruling that a mother who obtained a council house by deception can be classed as ‘intentionally homeless’ – overturning a previous decision that had significant implications for social housing landlords across England and Wales.
Lord Justice Stuart-Smith, sitting with Lord Justice Phillips and Lord Justice Cobb, held that Emilia Munemo was properly found to be intentionally homeless after she failed to disclose she already held a secure council tenancy in Birmingham when applying for a house in Wolverhampton.
Ms Munemo was granted an introductory tenancy of a three-bedroom house on Thompson Avenue, Wolverhampton, in 2020 after falsely stating on her application form that she had never been a council tenant. When the deception was discovered in 2021, the Council obtained a possession order, and Ms Munemo was evicted in March 2023.
The central legal dispute concerned whether Ms Munemo could be found intentionally homeless under section 191 of the Housing Act 1996. A county court judge had quashed the Council’s decision, applying principles from the earlier Court of Appeal decision in Chishimba v Kensington & Chelsea RLBC [2013], which suggested that accommodation obtained by deception could not be considered ‘reasonable to continue to occupy.’
However, the Court of Appeal found that Chishimba was distinguishable. Unlike that case, Ms Munemo had a secure tenancy – not merely a non-secure one – and the Council had not been required to prove she was ineligible for assistance. Crucially, the court held that when assessing reasonableness, a person cannot rely on their own deliberate deception to argue that accommodation was unreasonable to occupy.
Lord Justice Stuart-Smith observed that applying the appellant’s logic would mean ‘any person who induces the grant of a tenancy of suitable and satisfactory accommodation by deception will not be intentionally homeless’ – a result that would ’emasculate section 191 and prevent it from achieving its statutory purpose.’
The decision restores the Council’s original review decision and provides important clarity for local authorities seeking to recover possession from tenants who have obtained social housing through fraud.
Photo: Katrin Bolovtsova
Leave a Reply