header-logo header-logo

Local authority

07 October 2016
Issue: 7717 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of GS (by her litigation friend the Official Solicitor)) v Camden London Borough Council [2016] EWHC 1762 (Admin), [2016] All ER (D) 205 (Jul)

The Administrative Court partially allowed the application of the claimant, who suffered physical and mental health problems, for judicial review of the defendant local authority’s decision that she did not have a need for care and support, in particular, accommodation. The authority’s decision not to exercise its power under s 1 of the Localism Act 2011 had been unlawful, as it had had a duty to act to the extent that it was necessary for the purpose of avoiding a breach of the claimant’s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll