header-logo header-logo

Duty of care

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

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

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