header-logo header-logo

18 September 2008 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7337 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Care wars

Who pays—health or social services? asks Nicholas Dobson

True, there was no heavy and sinister hum of slashing light sabres, enhanced by resounding surround sound. But a fiercely civilised battle had nevertheless raged within the Victorian Gothic precincts of a galaxy—really rather nearby. For it had fallen to the Court of Appeal on 6 August 2008 to determine a “who pays for care” dispute between St Helen's Borough Council (the council) and the Manchester Primary Care Trust (PCT). The case report can be found at [2008] EWCA Civ 931, [2008] All ER (D) 58 (Aug) and, as the learned Yoda might have put it, Lord Justice May the leading judgment gave, and in agreement the other members of the court were (Lord Justice Scott Baker and Sir Peter Gibson).

The council was challenging the decision of the PCT taken “upon intensive consideration” that the needs of a woman suffering from disassociative identity disorder (and who had been involved with local authority social services since her birth) were not primarily health care related. The decision was financially

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll