Advertise on podcast: Home Truths - The Housing Podcast from 42BR Barristers

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this eleventh podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Stefan Liberadzki discuss Powell v Dacorum Borough Counsel, heard by the Court of Appeal in 2019: one of the first big housing cases about the Public Sector Equality Duty, which establishes, firstly, that compliance with the PSED is fact-specific and also function-specific (that is, it depends on what sort of public function the local authority is exercising); secondly, that compliance is a matter of substance not form, requiring a conscientious consideration of all the relevant factors in good faith; and thirdly – perhaps most importantly in practice – that an earlier breach of the PSED is capable of being remedied by a public sector landlord, so long as it does conduct a PSED assessment by the time of the Court hearing.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this tenth podcast, Iris Ferber KC and James Hoile discuss Bracking v DWP, 2013’s foundational discrimination case about the Public Sector Equality Duty in section 149 of the Equality Act.  Although this was not a housing case, it was the first case authority to consider the (then) new duty, and it gave the Court of Appeal the opportunity to set out the fundamentals of how public bodies should comply with the PSED.  After looking at the history of the duty, and at the wording of section 149, we summarise the principles set out by the Court of Appeal, the extent of the duty, and its practical limitations.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this ninth podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Martin Horne discuss Asiimwe v London Borough of Lambeth, a reasonable adjustments case heard by the High Court in June 2026: we believe that this is the first housing case to address the application of the Equality Act burden of proof.  The burden of proof in section 136 of the Equality Act is notoriously complex, and very different from the standard civil burden of proof: Employment Tribunals are familiar with its workings, but even they sometimes get it wrong in reasonable adjustments cases, where it is particularly difficult to apply.  Tune in for our discussion of how the High Court explained section 136, and how Mr Asiimwe won his appeal – based purely on the trial judge’s failure to apply section 136 correctly.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this eighth podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Carolina Bax discuss R (FG) v Royal London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, heard by the High Court in 2024: an important reasonable adjustments case, which answers some fundamental questions in reasonable adjustments claims relating to housing – including the crucial question of whether Part 3 of the Equality Act (“Public Functions”) or Part 4 (“Premises”) applies to local authority landlords; what are the differences between those two  regimes; and why it really, really matters.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this seventh podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Max Gordon discuss Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets, heard by the Court of Appeal in 2025: a case which explains how to (or, rather, how not to) present an indirect discrimination claim under section 19 of the Equality Act 2010 – in particular, it illustrates and explains the dangers of choosing the wrong “provision, criterion or practice” operated by the landlord, as the basis of the claim.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this sixth podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Karolina Zielinska discuss Thiam v Richmond Housing Partnership, a High Court appeal from 2025: a case which explains how section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 – “discrimination arising from disability” – can operate as a defence to a possession claim.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this fifth podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Andrew Carter discuss AB v Westminster City Council, heard by the High Court in 2024: a very useful case which explains how to pursue – or defend – allegations of indirect discrimination under section 19 of the Equality Act 2010.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided.  In this fourth podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Matthew Timm discuss Laidley v Metropolitan Housing Trust, heard by the Court of Appeal in 2025: an important case about Equality Act assessors.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this third podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Natalie Foster discuss Nightingale v Bromford Housing, heard by the High Court in 2024.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this second podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Peter Jolley discuss Paragon Asra Housing v Neville, heard by the Court of Appeal in 2018.

From Akerman-Livingstone to Z v Hackney, learn about the cases and the principles which have shaped Housing Discrimination since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.  In each of our podcasts, we will discuss one case: its facts, its context, and what principles it decided. In this first podcast, Iris Ferber KC and Karolina Zielinska start at “A”: Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities, heard by the Supreme Court in 2015.

Krishma Patel and Karolina Zielinska discuss the upcoming implementation of Awaab’s Law in the proposed ‘The Hazards in Social Housing (Prescribed Requirements) (England) Regulations 2025’, and the proposed extension of Awaab’s Law and the Decent Homes Standard to the private rental sector in the current version of the Renters’ Rights Bill.

Max Gordon and Matthew Timm discuss the proposed implied right to have pets in rented accommodation, the changes to this proposal as the Renters' Rights Bill progresses through Parliament, and what it may mean for tenants and landlords.

Iris Ferber KC and Natalie Foster discuss the brand new provisions in Chapter 3 of the Renters’ Rights Bill, dealing with discriminatory practices against tenants with children and benefits claimants.What do the new provisions mean? How do they relate to the existing discrimination provisions that already apply to landlords and agents in the Equality Act 2010? How is a “benefits claimant” defined? What sort of conduct is going to be prohibited?And who is going to enforce these new rights? Tune in, to answer all these questions and more.

Join Iris Ferber KC and Alex Bailey for this all-in-one overview of every single ground for possession, in the new version of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1988 (as it will look after the Renters' Rights Bill becomes law).Essential listening for any landlord needing to obtain possession of a tenanted property after the abolition of section 21 takes effect.