No excessive formalism in housing allowance refusal

ATA/704/1996Court of Justice / Administrative ChamberNov 26, 1996Dismissed

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The tenants sought housing allowance, arguing that the housing authority acted with excessive formalism. The authority refused the allowance for a determined period because the tenants did not answer a question concerning OCPA supplementary benefits and did not return a duly completed renewal application despite a formal notice. The court held that these requirements were legitimate and that the authority was not formally excessive. The challenge was therefore dismissed.

Omnilex headnote

RLGL.22; housing allowance; excessive formalism: an authority does not act with excessive formalism when it refuses a housing allowance after the applicants fail to answer a relevant question and, despite formal notice, do not return a duly completed renewal application. Procedural requirements intended to ensure the completeness of the file are permissible where the parties are given a real opportunity to cure the defect; refusal in such circumstances is not arbitrary insistence on form for its own sake.

Full text

Descripteurs

LOGEMENT; FORMALISME EXCESSIF; LOYER; ALLOCATION DE LOGEMENT; LOGEMENT SOCIAL; REVENU DETERMINANT; DEMEURE; IEA

Normes

RLGL.22

Résumé

L'OLS ne fait pas preuve de formalisme excessif en n'octroyant pas l'allocation de logement pour une période déterminée au motif d'une part que les locataires concernés n'ont pas répondu à la question relative aux prestations complémentaires de l'OCPA et d'autre part en ne retournant pas dûment complétée la demande de renouvellement malgré une mise en demeure formelle.

Keywords

housing allowanceexcessive formalismrenewal applicationsupplementary benefitssocial housingadministrative noticeprocedural requirements

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether refusing the housing allowance for a fixed period amounted to excessive formalism.

Extracted holding

No. The authority was entitled to refuse the allowance because the tenants did not answer the question on OCPA supplementary benefits and did not properly return the renewal form even after formal notice.

Extracted reasoning

The procedural requirements served a legitimate administrative purpose and the applicants were given a formal opportunity to regularize their filing. In these circumstances, the authority did not insist on form for its own sake.

No excessive formalism in housing allowance refusalAI generated