Al-Ameri v. Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

The House of Lords held that residence in accommodation provided to destitute asylum seekers under the National Asylum Support Service dispersal scheme could not, as a matter of law, be treated as residence "of his own choice" for the purpose of establishing a "local connection" under section 199(1)(a) of the Housing Act 1996. The court construed section 199(1)(a) strictly: the relevant enquiry is whether the person chose to live in that particular district. Because the 1999 Act and the NASS dispersal scheme required the Secretary of State to disregard any preference of the asylum seeker as to locality (section 97(2) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999) and effectively placed the choice of locality in the hands of the State, residence in NASS accommodation was not "of [the asylum seeker's] own choice" and therefore could not give rise to a local connection under section 199(1)(a).

The Lords noted that this does not preclude the possibility of a local connection being established on other statutory grounds (employment, family associations or special circumstances) or that an erstwhile asylum seeker, after his or her status ended, might in time acquire a residence of his or her own choice by continued residence and other facts. The Secretary of State's failure to exercise the power in section 199(5) to specify other circumstances did not alter the statutory meaning of section 199(1)(a).

This case concerned two former asylum seekers (the respondents) who, while awaiting determination of their asylum claims, were accommodated in Glasgow under the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) dispersal scheme. After being granted leave to remain they moved to London and applied to London local housing authorities for homelessness accommodation under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 (in particular section 193). The London authorities accepted a potential duty but referred the applications to Glasgow under section 198 on the ground that the respondents had a "local connection" with Glasgow, relying on residence under section 199(1)(a).

The central legal issue was whether residence in NASS-provided accommodation, where the asylum seeker was not permitted to choose the locality (section 97(2) Immigration and Asylum Act 1999), could be "residence of his own choice" within section 199(1)(a) of the 1996 Act and therefore create a local connection permitting referral under section 198.

• Nature of the claim/application: statutory appeals against local authority referrals under section 198 of the Housing Act 1996; respondents sought to prevent referral to Glasgow and to secure duty of the London authorities.
• Issues framed by the court: whether "residence ... of his own choice" in section 199(1)(a) includes residence in accommodation allocated by NASS dispersal; whether the statutory scheme of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (notably sections 95–97) and the dispersal policy affected the construction of section 199(1)(a).
• Court's reasoning: the House construed the phrase literally and contextually. The statutory scheme for asylum support placed the choice of locality with the Secretary of State and expressly required disregarding the asylum seeker's preference. Consequently, an asylum seeker placed under the dispersal scheme did not choose the district and so his or her normal residence in that district could not, as a matter of law, found a local connection under section 199(1)(a). The court emphasised the continuing possibility that other grounds in section 199(1) or factual changes (for example, continued residence after asylum status ended) could give rise to a local connection.

Procedural posture: the cases reached the House of Lords on appeal from the Court of Appeal ([2003] EWCA Civ 235) after county court decisions at first instance. The House dismissed the appeals by the London local authorities.

Appeal dismissed. The House held that "residence ... of his own choice" in section 199(1)(a) of the Housing Act 1996 requires that the person himself or herself chose the district of residence; residence imposed by the NASS dispersal scheme (where the Secretary of State must disregard any preference under section 97(2) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999) is not residence of the asylum seeker's own choice and therefore cannot, as a matter of law, give rise to a local connection under section 199(1)(a). The court emphasised that other statutory grounds or post-status factual changes might, however, establish a local connection.

Appeals to the county court (Her Honour Judge Dangor in Osmani; His Honour Judge Reynolds in Al-Ameri); appeals to the Court of Appeal (allowed by majority) [2003] EWCA Civ 235; further appeal to the House of Lords ([2004] UKHL 4) which dismissed the appeals.