header-logo header-logo

19 March 2010
Issue: 7409 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Social security

R (on the application of Savva) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea [2010] EWHC 414 (Admin), [2010] All ER (D) 118 (Mar)

The claimant completed a personal budget supported self-assessment questionnaire (SAQ). After a hospital visit she completed another and was allocated a higher points score; however the monetary value was unchanged and no reasons given.

The court ruled that there was a requirement for there to be reasons given by a panel that was making a decision relating to a personal budget, and the provision of direct payments under s 57 of the Health and Social Care Act 2001 in discharge of its duty under s 2 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970.

Personal budgets were new and in many ways represented a fundamental shift in community care. It would have to be incumbent on those responsible for that provision, to be transparent, and to explain individual decisions in a precise and clear manner.
 

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: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll