header-logo header-logo

Inadequate engagement

02 February 2018 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7779 / Categories: Features , Public , Community care
printer mail-detail
nlj_7779_dobson

Nicholas Dobson considers what happened when a local authority fell short on its duties to cater for a vulnerable parent & disabled child

  • A local authority’s decision letter where a vulnerable single parent and an extensively disabled child were assessed as having no identified medical or housing needs had very serious defects.

Balancing identified need against painfully slender housing and financial resources is always a tough call for local authorities. And the task is even tougher when vulnerable children are involved. But, despite all pressures, councils must make lawful and rational decisions in the light of applicable law and all other material considerations.

Unfortunately, one authority fell short and attracted considerable judicial criticism when a housing decision letter concerning a single parent (J) and a child with an extensive range of disabilities (L) was vitiated by ‘very serious defects’. The case in question was R (J and another) v London Borough of Hillingdon [2017] EWHC 3411 (Admin), judgment of which was issued by Nicklin J on 21 December 2017.

Background

J (who suffered

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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

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