header-logo header-logo

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

Care needs in hard times

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll