header-logo header-logo

10 August 2012 / Tim Spencer-Lane
Issue: 7526 / Categories: Features , Local government , Public , Community care
printer mail-detail

Duty of care

Tim Spencer-Lane examines recent case law involving the community care responsibilities of local councils

Two recent High Court decisions have put down markers for local councils who are seeking to reduce the costs of community care services. In both cases, the court emphasised the importance of following statutory guidance, carrying out adequate consultation and complying with the general public sector equality duty.

Sefton

In R (Sefton Care Association) v Sefton Council [2011] EWHC 2676 (Admin), the court quashed the council’s decision to freeze the fees it paid for people placed in residential care. For several years, the council had increased its residential care fees and had always sought the views of local care home providers, but in 2010 it informed providers that there would be no increase due to an overspend in community care. No prior consultation was carried out.

This freeze was continued for a second year, despite reassurances from the council of a two per cent increase for the following years. The council’s decision was successfully challenged by Seton

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