header-logo header-logo

24 November 2011 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7491 / Categories: Features , Local government , Public
printer mail-detail

A happy ending?

Nicholas Dobson follows the story of the Brent library closures

Hercules is notable for successful completion of twelve particularly challenging “labours”. These included: slaying the Nemean lion (a deceptive monster with impenetrable golden fur) and writing-off the toxic-dunged, man-eating Stymphalian birds. Echoes of these labours may spring to mind when considering the factors underpinning Brent Council’s decision to close six public libraries as outlined in last month’s judgment of Ouseley J (R (Bailey and others) v. London Borough of Brent Council [2011] EWHC 2572 (Admin), [2011] All ER (D) 123 (Oct)).

Library closures challenged

In the light of anticipated budget cuts and earlier work in this area (and following extensive consultation and an equalities impact assessment (EIA)) the council’s executive (a group of senior decision-making council members) decided to adopt part of the “libraries transformation project” (LTP) recommended by officers. This would involve closure of six of the borough’s 12 public libraries.
The claimants challenging the decision were residents of the Brent borough who (with their supporters) use the libraries in question.

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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