header-logo header-logo

03 December 2009 / Ed Mitchell , Clive Lewis KC
Issue: 7396 / Categories: Features , Community care
printer mail-detail

Lethal weapon?

New equality legislation has strengthened the hand of challengers to community care charging decisions, say Ed Mitchell & Clive Lewis QC

The equality legislation has provided a new weapon in the armoury of those who wish to challenge community care charging decisions.

However, it remains very difficult to mount a successful legal challenge to a carefully planned decision to introduce or increase charges. The latest case to illustrate this point was the Court of Appeal’s decision in R (Domb & Others) v Hammersmith & Fulham LBC [2009] EWCA Civ 941.

Hammersmith & Fulham LBC had decided to reduce its council tax by 3% and so had to make savings or increase revenue. So far as the contribution of home care services to balancing the books was concerned, the council decided that it either had to raise eligibility thresholds (provide fewer services) or introduce charges.

Following a consultation exercise, the council decided to start charging although a means test would be applied so that poorer service users would continue to pay nothing.

Three

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll