header-logo header-logo

Care needs in hard times

11 November 2010 / Ed Mitchell
Issue: 7441 / Categories: Features , Public , Community care
printer mail-detail

Ed Mitchell reports on council & court failures to deliver community care

Increasingly, local authorities are having to take hard decisions about the provision of community care services. The Court of Appeal’s decision in R (McDonald) v Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea [2010] EWCA Civ 1109, in which it determined a judicial review claim at first instance, is the latest to confirm that it is for an authority to decide how it deploys its community care resources. In other words, the hard decisions are essentially for local authorities to take and not the courts. Accordingly, an authority was entitled to decide to meet an eligible community care need for assistance safely to urinate at night by supplying continence pads rather than the more expensive option of funding a night carer (R v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Daykin [1998] 1 CCLR 512).

Other aspects of the Court of Appeal’s decision are also of note. The court held that if a local authority has decided precisely to define an eligible need

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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll