header-logo header-logo

Community Care law update

24 March 2009 / Ed Mitchell
Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Community care
printer mail-detail

Community care

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

More and more social services authorities are tightening their eligibility criteria for community care services. In December 2007, the High Court in R (on the application of Chavda and others) v Harrow London Borough Council [2007] EWHC 3064 (Admin), [2007] All ER (D) 337 (Dec), considered whether or not it was lawful for an authority to restrict eligibility to persons with a “critical” need for services under the Department of Health’s Fair Access to Care Services (FACS) guidance.

The court held that, in principle, it was lawful for an authority to restrict eligibility to those with critical needs. However, it also held that ’s decision to restrict eligibility was unlawful because it had failed, in taking that decision, to discharge its obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA 1995). Section 49A of DDA 1995 required “in carrying out its functions to have regard to the need to…promote equality of opportunity between disabled persons and other persons”. The court held that had failed to

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll