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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll