header-logo header-logo

27 September 2007 / Ed Mitchell , Clive Lewis
Issue: 7290 / Categories: Features , Community care
printer mail-detail

Community care law update

PAYING FOR LONG TERM CARE
HUMAN RIGHTS AND PRIVATE CARE HOMES
PROTECTING VULNERABLE ADULTS

ACCIDENT VICTIMS’ LONG TERM CARE

Care costs money. The greater the care needs, the greater the cost. Where the care needs arise because of another’s negligence, who should pay? Most would say the tortfeasor. However, the complex interaction of a number of legal rules sometimes leads to local social services authorities having to foot the bill. Accordingly, in these cases massive resources are required in order to provide lifetime care for a person who has suffered catastrophic injuries in an accident and local authorities often find themselves shocked to learn that they, rather than the tortfeasor, are expected to find the resources.
Case law to date has focused on accident victims who require residential care. The Court of Appeal’s decision in Crofton v NHS Litigation Authority [2007] EWCA Civ 71, [2007] All ER (D) 106 (Feb) however, concerned victims who require domiciliary care. The decision illustrates that the same transfer of responsibility from tortfeasor to local authority is

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