Fradkina, R (on the application of) v London Borough Of Barnet

A judicial review claim concerning an offer of council accommodation requires a sound legal basis for impugning the authority’s decision. Where the applicant has been given a clearly more appropriate statutory or administrative right of review, that alternative remedy may itself bar judicial review. The court may refuse permission where the claim is misconceived and has no real prospect of success.

The applicant rejected accommodation offered by the local authority and sought judicial review, contending that she was entitled to more permanent and secure accommodation. The offer letter notified her of a right to seek a review within 21 days, but she did not use it.

Permission was refused on the papers by Newman J, the matter was subsequently adjourned by Silber J to permit further evidence, and Stanley Burnton J refused the renewed oral application. The applicant sought permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The central questions were whether there was any arguable legal basis for challenging the accommodation offer and whether the alternative review procedure precluded judicial review.

1. Application refused. The claim was misconceived and devoid of merit.
2. There was no sound legal basis for impugning the local authority’s decision to offer the applicant and her family accommodation at the specified premises. The applicant had not established any legal entitlement to permanent or secure accommodation on the material before the court.
3. In any event, the right of review expressly notified in the offer letter was a clearly more appropriate alternative remedy. Its availability was independently sufficient to shut out the judicial review application.
4. The court rejected the application under both conventional domestic administrative-law principles and the Human Rights Act. The order was: application refused.

• High Court, Administrative Court: Newman J refused permission on the papers. Silber J later adjourned the permission application and permitted amendment and further evidence. Stanley Burnton J refused the renewed oral application.
• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): The application for permission to appeal was refused.