R (Hossack) v Kettering BC [2003]

Property was used as temporary accommodation for young people. The housing group selected residents, decided how long each should stay and, when each one should leave and which room each should occupy. The average stay was three to four months. The claimant argued that the use of the properties was use as separate hostels. The Council said that that the residents lived together as a single household so the use of the property had not changed. The claimant applied for judicial review. The Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court quashed the Council's decision that here, saying that the residents were not living as a single household as they did not come as a pre-formed group and did not stay for a pre-determined period. The property was therefore in multiple occupancy. The Council then applied to the Court of Appeal

HELD: The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, as the approch of the QBD judge had been too prescriptive. However, the Council had to redetermine the case as it had obviously overlooked the precise nature of the relationship between the residents, and this is clearly a material consideration.