News

Three mothers who challenged a council's policy on dealing with intentionally homeless families have lost their case.

The women, Dutch nationals originally from Somalia, had claimed that Birmingham Council's decision not to house them and their 13 children amounted to a breach of their human rights.

The authority had assessed the families' needs and decided that the women, who had fled domestic violence, should return to the Netherlands. If they refused the offer, the council would take their children into care under section 20 of the Children Act 1989.

A high court judge ruled the council was entitled to "take into account the acute strain so many new arrivals placed on its scarce resources".

Mr Justice Moses said that "an enormous financial burden" had been put on the council by the 260 families, 85 per cent of Somali origin, who had applied for assistance during the last year, costing £2.6m.

Birmingham Council had changed its policy on housing intentionally homeless families following an increase in arrivals from the Netherlands over the past two years.

Moses dismissed the claims by the women's counsel, Mr Christopher Vajda QC, that the decision to house children but not their parents breached the council's duty under the Children Act to keep the family together.

The court heard that since the policy change there had been a marked drop in the number of people from the Netherlands.

The mothers have remained in Birmingham, despite the council's policy, and now pass the habitual residence test, which entitles them to income support. They were refused the right to appeal against the ruling.