Keywords: Decision making, Fairness, Child in Need The case was brought on behalf of 2 children against a decision of Lambeth LBC that they were not ‘Children in Need’ (s.17 Children Act) on the basis of alleged destitution and risk of homelessness. The council had carried out an assessment in September 2016 and decided that […]
A woman and her children were homeless, and the council found the woman to have intentionally made herself so. The council declined to provide alternative assistance under the Children Act, because of the effect of Lambeth LBC ex p A (finding that there is no power to provide housing to parents, under s17, on the
Walker v Lambeth LBC (judgment 8 March 2002) (CA) Read More »
Section 17 Children Act 1989 – duty to provide accommodation The cases of A v Lambeth and J v Enfield were revisited in W v Lambeth Borough Council, where an intentionally homeless claimant challenged the council’s refusal to provide her and her family with accommodation under s17 Children Act 1989. The majority of the Court
W v Lambeth Borough Council [2002] EWCA Civ 613 Read More »
This was a challenge by the claimant (M) to the decision made by Suffolk County Council that it was precluded from making direct payments to M by regulation 7 of the Community Care Services for Carers and Children’s Services (Direct Payments) England Regulations 2003 (the Regulations). This provision states that direct payments “shall not be
The Queen on the application of M v Suffolk County Council [2006] EWHC 2366 (Admin) Read More »
When a local authority make a decision under s17(1) and (2) and s22 Children Act 1989 it must have adequate information on which to base its decision and its approach to the provision of services must be a holistic one. The Claimant was a 14 year old boy, identified as a ‘child in need’
S and her children had been temporarily accommodated under s188 Housing Act 1996 ( as appearing to be in priority need) at a hostel owned and managed by Hammersmith and Fulham LBC, but located in Lambeth. Her children went to school in Wandsworth. When Hammersmith decided that S was intentionally homeless and then sought possession
Stewart v London Borough of Wandsworth and others [2001] EWHC Admin 709 Read More »
In this case the claimant (SA) successfully challenged the decision by the defendant local authority to provide support to her as a child in need under s17 of the Children Act 1989 rather than as a ‘looked after’ child. In December 2004, following an assessment by the local authority in which it concluded that her
SA v A Local Authority [2010] EWHC 848 (Admin) Read More »
R (on the application of MM) (BY HIS MOTHER & LITIGATION FRIEND, TM) v HOUNSLOW LONDON BOROUGH COUNCIL (2015) Keywords: Disabled children, parent carer, assessment, eligibility criteria This case concerns events which occurred prior to the implementation of EHC plans under the Children and Families Act 2014. However, the core issues relate to social care
The claimant (M) applied for judicial review of a decision of the defendant local authority to provide her with temporary accommodation under the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness (Priority Need for Accommodation) (England) Order 2002, and sought a declaration that she was a “former relevant child” under the Children Act 1989 s.23C and the
This is an important ruling from the House of Lords setting out the relevant factors local authorities must consider when seeking to exercise their functions in relation to providing or assisting young people to find suitable accommodation. Changes to the Housing Act 1996 bought in by the Homelessness (Priority Need for Accommodation) (England) Order 2002
R (on the application of G) v Southwark London Borough Council (2009) UKHL 26 Read More »