The case of Steven Neary demonstrates that public bodies must know their place, says Tim Spencer-Lane
The Steven Neary case has attracted significant media and public attention (Hillingdon Council v Neary [2011] EWHC 1377 (COP), [2011] All ER (D) 57 (Jun)). This is due in no small part to a high profile internet and media campaign by the primary carer. But what is often overlooked is that the case also established important legal principles.
Unlawful detention
The facts are well known. Steven, a young man in his early 20s, has autism and a severe learning disability. He lived at home with his father, with high-levels of support services funded by Hillingdon Council. Steven lacks capacity to decide where or with whom he should live. In December 2009 his father reported to Hillingdon that he was having difficulties coping. The council arranged for Steven to stay in a residential support unit. However, staff found Steven’s behaviour very challenging, particular around food, and were concerned about him returning home. His father wanted
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
