ABSTRACT
The House of Lords has played an independent role in interpreting the homeless rights legislation. Starting with Andrew Arden's sympathetic assessment of the performance of the judiciary on the rights of homeless people this essay differs from his assessment of the judiciary's role towards homeless people as far as it applies to the most senior court, the House of Lords. It describes the nature of the issues where the House of Lords has restricted the operation of the homeless person's legislation. It also seeks to explore the reasons why this restrictive approach has been encountered. This stems from the curious relationship between politicians and the judiciary. This essay contrasts the restrictive role of their Lordships with other areas where the court has taken rather more generous perspectives on the rights of vulnerable people. One cannot simply assume that the House of Lords is the voice of reaction because of the shared class and educational backgrounds of its members.
