header-logo header-logo

29 November 2013 / Tim Spencer-Lane
Issue: 7586 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Harsh but fair?

Challenging a local authority on procedural grounds can prove difficult, as Tim Spencer-Lane reports

In an era of prolonged economic recession and public sector cuts, the challenges for both service users and local authorities are considerable. The tension between, on the one hand, supporting disabled people to live full and independent lives in the community, and on the other, local authorities’ obligation to constrain expenditure and remain within budget, was illustrated in the recent High Court case R(D) v Worcestershire County Council [2013] EWHC 2490 (Admin).

 

In 2012, the council adopted a policy under which the amount of money that is provided to support a disabled person living in the community would be based on the costs of meeting the same person’s needs in residential care. It was a policy which the council had already applied since 2008 to older people. Disabled groups argued that it would result in high levels of unmet need and coercive institutionalisation, because domiciliary care could not be provided which costs less than the equivalent costs of residential care. It was also contended that, in adopting the policy,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll