Category: Local Government

Barrett v Kirklees Metropolitan Council: Admn 12 Mar 2010

The claimant challenged the policy of the defendant to pay support to special guardians appointed under the 2002 Act at two thirds only of the rate it paid in fostering allowance.
Held: The policy was a substantial and insufficiently justified departure from the appropriate guidance, and was unlawful.

Judges:

Langan QC HHJ

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 467 (Admin), [2010] 2 FLR 405, [2010] 2 FCR 153, [2010] Fam Law 596

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Adoption and Children Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Islington Borough Council Ex Parte Rixon QBD 17-Apr-1996
The local authority regarded lack of resources or facilities as an insuperable obstacle to any further attempt to make provision under the 1970 Act.
Held: A Local Authority should allow for non-statutory guidance in assessing a disabled . .
Cited – B v London Borough of Lewisham and Another Admn 17-Apr-2008
. .
Cited – Mccook v Lobo and others CA 19-Nov-2002
The defendant was the occupier of premises. He did not direct how the work should be done and was not present at the time the work was being performed.
Held: He had not been in control of the relevant work. Judge LJ referred to Regulation 4(2) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption, Local Government

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.402618

KM, Regina (on The Application of) v Cambridgeshire County Council: CA 9 Jun 2011

The claimant was a severely disabled adult, entitled to assistance under the 1970 Act. He had been refused leave to bring judicial review of the decision as to the extent of that assistance.
Held: Leave was granted, and the court decided to hold the review itself. Doing so, it rejected the challenge, saying: ‘There has of course to be a rational link between the needs and the assessed direct payments, but, in our judgment, there does not need to be a finite absolute mathematical link. This is because (a) the local authority, whose funds are not limitless, are both entitled and obliged to moderate the assessed needs to take account of the relative severity of all those with community care needs in their area . . ; (b) the local authority are not obliged to meet an individual’s needs in absolute terms . .; (c) the use of the RAS as a starting point is lawful and the decision does not have to extend in every case to explaining the RAS in detail. . ; so that (d) . . it was not necessary in this case to provide a mathematical justification of the indicative andpound;61,000.’

Judges:

Sir Anthony May PFD, Jackson and Tomlinson LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 682, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 402

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 29(1), Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – KM, Regina (on The Application of) v Cambridgeshire County Council Admn 26-Nov-2010
The claimant sought leave to bring judicial review of the decision of the Respondent as to the amount attributable to his care package.
Held: Leave was refused. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – KM, Regina (on The Application of) v Cambridgeshire County Council SC 31-May-2012
The respondent had assessed the claimant’s annual care needs. He challenged the calculations. The authority had a system which calculated the average needs for support adding a sum to reflect particular critical need. An independent expert had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Health

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440462

Slough Borough Council v M, Regina (on the Application Of): CA 25 May 2006

The claimant was subject to immigration control. He sought assistance under the 1948 Act on the basis that he suffered HIV. The authority appealed an order requiring them to provide assistance on the basis that he need for medication brought him within the section.
Held: The authority’s appeal was dismissed. Care and attention could extend to the provision of shelter, warmth, food and other basic necessities. If the need was made ‘more acute’ by some other circumstance than mere lack of accommodation and funds, it did not arise ‘solely’ from destitution and the local authority was responsible.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward Lord Justice Kay

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 655, (2006) 9 CCL Rep 438, [2007] LGR 225, [2007] BLGR 225

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, National Assistance Act 1948 21(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – M, Regina (on the Application of) v Slough Borough Council Admn 27-Apr-2004
The claimant, a Zimbabwean, was subject to immigration control. He was HIV positive, and sought assistance from the authority under the 1948 Act. The authority replied that his needs did not reach such a level as to require assistance under the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – M, Regina (on the Application of) v Slough Borough Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local social services authority is obliged, under section 21(1)(a) of the 1948 Act, to arrange (and pay for) residential accommodation for a person subject to immigration control who is HIV positive but whose only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Immigration, Local Government

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.242185

W, Regina (on The Application of) v Birmingham City Council: Admn 19 May 2011

The claimants suffered disabilities and required assistance and support from the defendant council. They now challenged the couuncil’s decision that whereas in the past it had supported those with either severe or critical needs, it would now support only those with critical needs, excluding the applicants from support.
Held: The defendant’s decision that it could afford to meet only critical needs was unlawful because of deficiencies in the consultation process which had led to it.

Judges:

Walker J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1147 (Admin), (2011) 120 BMLR 134, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 516, [2011] ACD 84

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Savva, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea CA 28-Oct-2010
. .

Cited by:

Cited – KM, Regina (on The Application of) v Cambridgeshire County Council SC 31-May-2012
The respondent had assessed the claimant’s annual care needs. He challenged the calculations. The authority had a system which calculated the average needs for support adding a sum to reflect particular critical need. An independent expert had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.440078

Nassery, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Brent: CA 11 May 2011

The court was asked whether the judge was in error or not in refusing to set aside the decision of the respondent local authority, the London Borough of Brent that the appellant was not entitled to support under section 21(1) of the 1948 Act which enables a local authority to provide accommodation for a person in need of ‘care and attention’ for the purposes of that section.

Judges:

Ward, Arden, Moore-Bick LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 539

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, Local Government

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.439652

Mayfield Care Ltd and Another v St Helen’s Council: Admn 21 Apr 2015

‘The first and the second claimants each own and operate a care home in St. Helens. They are dissatisfied with the care home payment rates set by the defendant local authority for the provision of residential care accommodation for the financial year 2013/14 and by these judicial review proceedings seek an order quashing the decision to set those rates.’

Judges:

Stephens HHJ

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 1057 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government

Updated: 08 September 2022; Ref: scu.545692

Regina on The Prosecution of Armstring and Francis, Inbabitants And Parishioners of St Mary, Lambeth v Fajj And Others, Late Churchwardens, Doultion And Others Late Overseers, And Ball And Others, Collectors Of The Poor Rate, In The Said Parish: 10 May 1841

Citations:

[1841] EngR 660, (1841) 1 QB 636, (1841) 113 ER 1275

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.308838

Douce and Another v Staffordshire County Council: CA 19 Apr 2002

The claimant ran a Nursing Home. He sought damages from the respondent for economic losses suffered after an allegedly negligent interpretation by the authority of the Act led them to require of the claimant to employ more staff than the Act actually required. The authority required the home to staff it ‘to capacity’ rather than to the number of actual residents. The authority suggested that they had acted within their discretion, and that there was no proper claim against them.
Held: Such a claim was justiciable and should be allowed to proceed. This was an area of developing jurisprudence, and was a mixture of fact and law.

Judges:

Lord Justice Potter and Sir Denis Henry

Citations:

Times 02-May-2002, Gazette 30-May-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 506

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Registered Homes Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Negligence

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.170209

Regina on the Application of Kathro and Others and Llantwit Fardre Community Council v Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council: Admn 6 Jul 2001

Local residents sought to challenge the proposed determination of a planning application which involved a private finance initiative. One of the grounds was that the use of a negotiated tendering procedure for the purposes of the PFI was contrary to the Public Services Contracts Regulations 1993.
Held: That ground was rejected, but Richards J added: ‘In any event I have strong doubts about the claimants’ standing to raise this issue, though I need express those doubts only briefly. The correct procedure is a matter of obvious concern to tenderers or would-be tenderers, but those persons have their own remedies under the regulations themselves. The claimants have not been shown to be affected in any way by the choice of tendering procedure. They have seized on the point simply as a fall-back way of trying to stop the project. I see no wider public interest to be served by allowing a challenge, and in all the circumstances the claimants should not in my view be regarded as having a sufficient interest for the purposes of the PFI challenge.’

Judges:

Richards J

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 527, [2002] Env LR 15

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Public Services Contracts Regulations 1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the Application of the Personal Representatives of Christopher Beeson) v Dorset County Council and Another QBD 30-Nov-2001
The Council had provided financial assistance for the care of the claimant’s father before his death in a residential home. Those costs were in part recoverable as a civil debt. His father had given him the house by deed of gift. The regulations . .
Cited – Good Law Project Ltd and Others, Regina (on Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Admn 18-Feb-2021
Failure to Publish Contracts awards details
Challenge to alleged failures by the Secretary of State to comply with procurement law and policy in relation to contracts for goods and services awarded following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Held: The contracts had been awarded under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Planning

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.140345

Kirklees Council v Information Commissioner and Pali Ltd: UTAA 10 Mar 2011

Information rights – Environmental information – general -‘ the Commissioner’s determination that all of the information requested must be made available by the Appellant to the Second Respondent for examination in situ without charge, and that the Appellant was in breach of its duties under the Regulations in declining to do so, was correct and is confirmed. For the avoidance of doubt, this only requires the Appellant to make available for examination information held by it, whether electronically or in physical form, from which a set of answers to the standard enquiries on form Con29R in relation to the property can be derived. It does not require the Appellant to conduct any more refined evaluation of any such information or its actual relevance (if any) to any such enquiry, or to provide any information in the form of actual or putative answers to the enquiries themselves. Nor does it require the disclosure of any personal data contrary to Regulation 13.’

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 104 (AAC), [2011] AACR 44

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Information Regulations 2004, Local Land Charges Act 1975 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Local Government, Information

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.433518

Djanogly v Westminster City Council: CA 19 Apr 2011

The appellant challenged the defendant’s order imposing parking charges for motor-cycles. He challenged the assertion that the charges were properly part of a traffic management scheme, and secondly he attacked the findings of the respondent’s cost benefit analysis.
Held: Permission to appeal was refused. The respondent had properly sought to balance the costs of traffic management between the various road users. As to the financial analysis: ‘ the financial material in the relevant reports was no more and no less than forecasting, assembled in good faith. When errors occurred and were realised, they were rectified. If others remained, they were not of a nature or quality with the potential to vitiate the 2010 Order.’

Judges:

Maurice Kay VP, Smith, Moore-Bick LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 432

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Djanogly v City of Westminster Admn 16-Jul-2010
The claimant challenged the validity of parking orders made by the Council, in the imposition of charges for motor-cycles.
Held: The challenge was rejected. Pitchford LJ said: ‘ It seems to me almost self-evident that there will be a need to . .
Cited – E v Secretary of State for the Home Department etc CA 2-Feb-2004
The court was asked as to the extent of the power of the IAT and Court of Appeal to reconsider a decision which it later appeared was based upon an error of fact, and the extent to which new evidence to demonstrate such an error could be admitted. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Local Government

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.432837

Buckinghamshire County Council v Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames: CA 19 Apr 2011

Appeal against a decision refusing an application by the council to declare unlawful a decision of the the respondents to move SL from residential accommodation provided by the National Society for Epilepsy into other accommodation.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘The context here is an assessment under s.47 in which . . the duty is owed to SL to carry out a proper assessment of her needs. Nothing in that context requires BCC to be consulted before a care plan can be put into place. The obligation of a local authority to provide for those in need of care and attention due to age, illness or disability who are ordinary resident in their area is long-standing and is now established in s.21 of the 1948 Act. The 1990 Act did not alter this. Consequently BCC assumed responsibility for SL when she moved to private accommodation in their area and could have carried out their own s.47 assessment to resolve any issues between them and the LHA. This and the other factors . . point in my view decisively against the implication of the legal duty which is contended for.’

Judges:

Pill, Patten, Munby LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 457, [2011] ACD 83, [2011] Fam Law 814, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 426, [2012] PTSR 854,

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Health

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.432834

H and L v A City Council: CA 14 Apr 2011

The court was asked when and how it is proper for a local authority to make disclosure to someone’s commercial contacts of the fact that he is a convicted sex offender.
Held: Where human rights are involved, the appropriate standard of review which the court must adopt is not the Wednesbury test of irrationality but the more intense Daly standard.

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 403

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – E and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jun-2011
Judicial review was sought of a decision by the respondent to prosecute a child for her alleged sexual abuse of her younger sisters. Agencies other than the police and CPS considered that a prosecution would harm both the applicant and her sisters. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Human Rights, Administrative

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.432813

H, Regina (on The Application of) v Birmingham City Council: Admn 7 Dec 2010

The court heard an application by the claimant, by his mother and litigation friend, for judicial review of a decision of the defendant council relating to the review of a policy for providing respite care styled Fair Access to Short Breaks to Carers.

Judges:

Purle QC J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3754 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.431944

Countryliner Ltd v Surrey County Council: CA 8 Mar 2011

The claimant company said that the Council had failed to meet its duties under the Regulations when awarding contracts for public transport services.

Judges:

Longmore, Eterton LJJ, Sir Richard Buxton

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 373

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Public Contract Regulations 2006

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Local Government

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.431893

Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others: SC 2 Aug 2017

The court was asked who is legally responsible for paying for the work done by registered nurses in social rather than health care settings. Is the National Health Service responsible for all the work they do or are the social care funders responsible for at least some of it? The local authorities now appealed. The Health Boards and Secretary of State argue that the consistent view of the case law has been to respect the decisions of the NHS as to what services are necessary to meet all reasonable requirements, under section 3(1) of the 2006 Act, subject only to challenge on the usual judicial review grounds. Thus, it is said, there is nothing unusual in the NHS defining the limits of its responsibilities for itself. The proper construction of section 49(2) depends upon what the NHS decides is reasonably required. Against this, it is true that the courts have normally respected those decisions, subject only to challenges on conventional judicial review grounds; but in this case the NHS is arguing that it should be free to define the extent of the responsibilities of others, the local authorities or residents, by deciding for itself what is and what is not a nursing task, because all are agreed that there should be no funding gap between what is funded by the NHS and what is funded by local authorities with means-tested contributions from the clients. The limits of the local authorities’ responsibilities are defined by Parliament in section 49.
The local authorities’ primary argument was that the court should focus on the application rather than the interpretation of section 49. If it is accepted that the NHS must fund the presence of a nurse who is there to fulfil the legal or practical requirement that a nurse must be on duty at all times, then it follows that the NHS must fund everything that that nurse does while on call in this way.
Held: ‘stand-by’ time should have been included, and the Health Boards’ decisions were based on a misinterpretation of section 49(2) and must be quashed and re-taken in the light of the guidance given in para 44 of this judgment. The argument by the LAs failed: ‘The task of this court is to interpret the meaning of the words used by Parliament to impose a restriction on what local authorities may provide or arrange and thus indirectly to impose an obligation on the NHS to fund what the local authorities cannot provide or arrange. Interpretation must come before application. Once interpreted, it is for those on the ground to put that interpretation into practice.’ and: ”nursing care by a registered nurse’ covers (a) time spent on nursing care, in the sense of care which can only be provided by a registered nurse, including both direct and indirect nursing time as defined by the Laing and Buisson study; (b) paid breaks; (c) time receiving supervision; (d) stand-by time; and (e) time spent on providing, planning, supervising or delegating the provision of other types of care which in all the circumstances ought to be provided by a registered nurse because they are ancillary to or closely connected with or part and parcel of the nursing care which she has to provide.’

Judges:

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 56, [2017] WLR(D) 559, [2017] PTSR 1140, UKSC 2016/0054

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC 20170426 am Video, SC 20170426 pm Video

Statutes:

Health and Social Care Act 2001 49, Care Homes (Wales) Regulations 2002 18(3), Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014

Jurisdiction:

Wales

Citing:

At Admn – Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others Admn 11-Mar-2014
The claimant care home sought judicial review of decisions setting the rates for funded nursing care. The care homes’ challenge was on the basis that too restrictive an interpretation of ‘nursing care by a registered nurse’ had been adopted.
At CA – Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others CA 2-Feb-2016
The Health Trusts appealed against the quashing at first instance of the rates they were to pay for nursing care to certain residents in care homes. The Health Boards conceded, as they had done below, that they had been wrong to exclude the nurses’ . .
Cited – Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart HL 26-Nov-1992
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute
The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the . .
Cited – Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor CA 16-Jul-1999
Consultation to be Early and Real Listening
The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and another, ex parte Spath Holme Limited HL 7-Dec-2000
The section in the 1985 Act created a power to prevent rent increases for tenancies of dwelling-houses for purposes including the alleviation of perceived hardship. Accordingly the Secretary of State could issue regulations whose effect was to limit . .
Cited – St Helens Borough Council v Manchester Primary Care Trust and Another CA 6-Aug-2008
The Trust and Local authority disputed responsibility for the care of a woman whose mental and psychological conditions required constant and expensive care.
Held: Responsibility for the decision fell on the Primary Care Trust as agent for the . .
Cited – Grogan, Regina (on the Application of) v Bexley NHS Care Trust and others Admn 25-Jan-2006
The claimant was elderly and in need of care in a nursing home. She claimed that her care needs had been assessed by an unlawful protocol applied by the health authority. She said that she qualified under the criteria for Continuing Health Care.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Local Government

Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.591357

Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others: Admn 11 Mar 2014

The claimant care home sought judicial review of decisions setting the rates for funded nursing care. The care homes’ challenge was on the basis that too restrictive an interpretation of ‘nursing care by a registered nurse’ had been adopted.
Held: The review was granted. The services prohibited by section 49 for local authorities to provide had instead to be provided by the local health board and the defendant in adopting the restrictive approach that they did to ‘nursing care by a registered nurse’, the health boards’ decisions were fundamentally flawed and were unlawful.

Judges:

Hickinbottom J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 601 (Admin), [2015] WLR(D) 134, [2015] PTSR 945

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Care Homes (Wales) Regulations 2002 18(3), Health and Social Care Act 2001 49

Jurisdiction:

Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others CA 2-Feb-2016
The Health Trusts appealed against the quashing at first instance of the rates they were to pay for nursing care to certain residents in care homes. The Health Boards conceded, as they had done below, that they had been wrong to exclude the nurses’ . .
At Admn – Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others SC 2-Aug-2017
The court was asked who is legally responsible for paying for the work done by registered nurses in social rather than health care settings. Is the National Health Service responsible for all the work they do or are the social care funders . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government

Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.544231

Surrey County Council v NHS Lincolnshire Clinical Commissioning Group: QBD 21 Dec 2020

Surrey County Council brought a private law claim in restitution against the Defendant, NHS Lincolnshire Clinical Commissioning Group, to recover sums paid by the Council for the costs of accommodation and care of JD, a young man with autism spectrum disorder. JD was born in Surrey but accommodated in specialist autism care in Lincolnshire at the age of 17 years.

Judges:

The Hon Mrs Justice Thornton

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 3550 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.656964

Sita UK Ltd v Greater Manchester Waste Disposal Authority: CA 24 Feb 2011

The claimant said that the defendant, in awarding a contract for the disposal of waste, had infringed the regulations constituting public procurement law.

Judges:

Arden, Rimer, Elias LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 156

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 89/665

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, European

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430048

St Helens Borough Council v Manchester Primary Care Trust and Another: CA 6 Aug 2008

The Trust and Local authority disputed responsibility for the care of a woman whose mental and psychological conditions required constant and expensive care.
Held: Responsibility for the decision fell on the Primary Care Trust as agent for the Secretary of State for Health, and the decision could not be made by the social services department alone. Cases such as this should not be resolved by expensive litigation. There was no gap between health care and social service care, only a line.

Judges:

May LJ, Scott Baker Lj, Sir Peter Gibson

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 931, Times 06-Oct-2008, [2009] PTSR 105

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Health Service Act 2006 1 2 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others SC 2-Aug-2017
The court was asked who is legally responsible for paying for the work done by registered nurses in social rather than health care settings. Is the National Health Service responsible for all the work they do or are the social care funders . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Local Government

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.272250

Grogan, Regina (on the Application of) v Bexley NHS Care Trust and others: Admn 25 Jan 2006

The claimant was elderly and in need of care in a nursing home. She claimed that her care needs had been assessed by an unlawful protocol applied by the health authority. She said that she qualified under the criteria for Continuing Health Care.
Held: The question for the court was whether in carrying out its assessment the Defendant had taken a lawful approach in, and by applying, its criteria, and whether it did not apply the primary health need approach. The criteria used were flawed as alleged.

Judges:

Charles J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 44 (Admin), [2006] LGR 491

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Health Service Act 1977 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor CA 16-Jul-1999
Consultation to be Early and Real Listening
The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were . .
Cited – Regina v North Derbyshire Health Authority ex parte Kenneth Graeme Fisher Admn 11-Jul-1997
The court considered the duty of the authority to take account of guidance issued by the Secretary of State: ‘If the circular provided no more than guidance, albeit in strong terms, then the only duty placed upon health authorities was to take it . .

Cited by:

Cited – Green, Regina (on the Application of) v South West Strategic Health Authority Admn 28-Oct-2008
The claimant said that whilst resident in a care home, her care should have been paid for as health care under ‘Continuing Health Care.’ She said that the decision maker had failed to comply with the Health Authorities guidelines.
Held: In . .
Cited – Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others SC 2-Aug-2017
The court was asked who is legally responsible for paying for the work done by registered nurses in social rather than health care settings. Is the National Health Service responsible for all the work they do or are the social care funders . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Benefits, Local Government

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.238156

Tower Hamlets London Borough Council and another v Sherwood and another: CA 18 Feb 2002

The applicants had constructed kiosks on the highway with permission from the local authority under the 1990 Act. They also had licences under the 1980 act to operate as street traders. The authority later complained that the sales from the structures were not street sales, and the licences were not valid.
Held: The licensing system was intended to supplement the law of nuisance, by proscribing street trading falling short of nuisance. Trading from such structures was not street trading, and was not regulated under the 1990 Act. It was not appropriate to decide the question of whether an offence had occurred, by looking at tiny questions of when in time the sales took place. There was no promise to be implied allowing the traders a licence, or that they should be granted a lease. Nevertheless, there was an estoppel against the local authority which had represented that a licence would continue for 22 years, and it would be held to it.

Judges:

Peter Gibson, Chadwick, Longmore LLJ

Citations:

Gazette 27-Feb-2002, Times 04-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 229, [2002] LLR 329

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

London Local Authorities Act 1990 21(1), Highways Act 1980 Part VIIA

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Licensing, Nuisance, Estoppel

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.167710

Hertfordshire County Council, Regina (on The Application of) v JM: CA 15 Feb 2011

The court was asked which local authority had responsibility to provide support to a patient on his discharge after a period of detention under section 3 of the 1983 Act.

Judges:

Carnwath, Rimer, Sullivan LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 77, [2011] BLGR 536, [2011] MHLR 76, [2011] Med LR 181, [2011] PTSR 1623, (2011) 119 BMLR 27, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 224, [2011] ACD 60

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Cornwall Council, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Somerset County Council SC 8-Jul-2015
PH had severe physical and learning disabilities and was without speech, lacking capacity to decide for himself where to live. Since the age of four he received accommodation and support at public expense. Until his majority in December 2004, he was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Local Government

Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.428862

SL, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Council: Admn 15 Nov 2010

Application for permission to seek judicial review of a decision in a letter from the Council’s solicitor, to refuse to accommodate the claimant pursuant to duties under section 21(1)(a) of the National Assistance Act 1948.
Held: The claim failed. Important as was the social work support to SL’s well being, it did not amount to ‘care and attention’ for the purposes of section 21(1)(a) of the 1948 Act: ‘To suggest that the claimant needs ‘looking after’ would stretch the meaning of those words beyond their proper limit. In my judgment, it would be more accurate to say that the support that the claimant needs amounts to keeping an eye on him. That is a rather different matter. It imports the notion that whilst keeping an eye on him, if circumstances change, different or further interventions might become necessary. It is not, however, in my view, care and attention.’

Judges:

Burnett J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3182 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 21(1)(a)

Cited by:

Appeal from – SL v Westminster City Council and Others CA 10-Aug-2011
The claimant sought judicial review of the Council’s rejection of his request for assistance under the 1948 Act. He was a failed asylum seeker, who having been destitute, had become mentally ill.
Held: The applicant’s appeal succeeded. As to . .
At first instance – SL v Westminster City Council SC 9-May-2013
The applicant for assistance from the respondent Council under the 1948 Act was a destitute, homeless failed asylum seeker. He had been admitted to hospital for psychiatric care, but the Council had maintained that his condition was part of and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Housing

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427391

L, Regina (on The Application of) v Leeds City Council: Admn 12 Nov 2010

The court considered a claim for judicial review based on an allegation that the local authority was failing in its duty towards a child suffering cystic fibrosis, in not providing a ttreatment room for her in her own home.
Held: The court emphasised the eed for a claimant seeking judicial review to provide clear grounds for the request.

Judges:

Langstaff J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3324 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hinds, Regina (on The Application of) v Blackpool Council Admn 17-Mar-2011
The council had resolved to grant planning permission for a development, but before the permission was actually granted the Secretary of State had written to planning authorities saying that he intended to abolish the ‘Regional Spatial Strategies’. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427280

Commission v Spain (Freedom Of Establishment): ECJ 16 Sep 2010

ECJ Opinion – Infringement proceedings – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 93/37/EEC – Directive 2004/18/EC – Public works contracts – Public service contracts – Public service concession – Public works concession – Land development – Urban planning and development laws in the Valencia region.

Judges:

Jaaskinen AG

Citations:

C-306/08, [2010] EUECJ C-306/08

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 93/37/EEC, Directive 2004/18/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Commission v Spain (Freedom Of Establishment) ECJ 26-May-2011
ECJ Judgment – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directives 93/37/EEC and 2004/18/EC – Procedures for the award of public works contracts – Urban development legislation of the Autonomous . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.424165

Audit Commission for England and Wales v Ealing London Borough Council: CA 16 May 2005

The authority complained that the respondent intended to adopt the assessment of its performance the judgment of a third party.
Held: There had been no unlawful delegation of the Audit Commissions duties. The Commission for Social Care Inspectorate was a statutory body with duties to assess the performance of social services provision.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Latham LJ, Keene LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 556, Times 26-May-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government Act 2003 99

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Ealing London Borough Council v The Audit Commission for Local Authorities and Another Admn 17-Feb-2005
The authority complained at the intended use by the respondent of a performance assessment issued by a third party. The Audit Commision appealed.
Held: The use of the third party assessment was proper where that body had the appropriate skills . .
Cited – Lavender v Minister of Housing and Local Government 1970
While it is not for the courts to interfere with the formulation or administration of the Minister’s planning policies, the Minister is not able to dictate the exercise of discretion on the basis of a policy mandate. . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment ex parte North Tyneside Borough Council 1990
The Secretary of State was entitled in his rate support grant each year to adopt for the population of an area the figure estimated by the Registrar General, rather than determining the figure itself. That was not regarded by the court as an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.224921

Ocean Outdoor UK Ltd v The London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham: CA 8 Oct 2019

Judges:

Coulson LJ, Snowden J, Sir Andrew Longmore

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 1642, [2019] PTSR 1714, [2019] WLR(D) 555

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Concession Contracts Regulations 2016, Parliament and Council Directive 2014/23/EU

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, European

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.642677

Technoprint Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Leeds City Council and Another: Admn 24 Mar 2010

The claimant challenged the grant of a planning permission, saying that it had been signed by an officer of the Council, but that there was no valid scheme or delegation of powers in place.

Judges:

Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 581 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Planning, Local Government

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.406150

Bewry, Regina (on The Application of) v Norfolk County Council: Admn 6 Oct 2010

The claimant had had foster care of two children. They were with temporary respite placements when the respondent decided to place in a different foster setting but without consulting the claimant or otherwise giving him notice.
Held: (ex tempore) The request was granted.
There was no general duty at common law to consult with a foster carer, nor any particular mention of foster carers in the lists created in section 22(4) of the 1989 Act: ‘however, a foster parent, being a person, is someone who may, on the facts and in the circumstances of a particular case, fall within the sub paragraph (d). In most cases, and certainly this case, the foster parent who has been, or is, currently actively involved in the life of a child is obviously somebody in relation to whom the local authority needs at least to pause and consider whether he might be a person whose wishes and feelings the authority should consider to be relevant regarding the matter to be decided.’
Nor was there here any emergency to justify urgent action. Given the claimant’s non-cooperation with the Council, their decision to proceed may be understandable, but they had a duty to consult and did not do so: ‘if they had given consideration to the question of consultation with the claimant, this local authority could not have reasonably considered, and no local authority could reasonably have considered, that his wishes and feelings were other than relevant regarding the matter to be decided.’

Judges:

Holman J

Citations:

[2011] 1 FLR 945, [2011] Fam Law 137, [2010] EWHC 2545 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 22(4)

Cited by:

See Also – Bewry v Reed Elseveir (UK) Ltd and Another QBD 10-Oct-2013
The claimant had begin proceedings against the defendant legal publishers, saying that their summary of a cash had brought was defamatory. He now sought leave to extend the limitation period for his claim, and the defendants argued that, given the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Local Government

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425597

Savva, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: CA 28 Oct 2010

Judges:

Maurica Kay LJ VP, Longmore, Patten LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1209

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Savva, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Admn 11-Mar-2010
The claimant challenged the defendant’s policies on caring for elderly people within the community saying that it provided insufficient funds, and the procedures for review were inadequate and infringed her human rights. . .

Cited by:

Cited – W, Regina (on The Application of) v Birmingham City Council Admn 19-May-2011
The claimants suffered disabilities and required assistance and support from the defendant council. They now challenged the couuncil’s decision that whereas in the past it had supported those with either severe or critical needs, it would now . .
Cited – KM, Regina (on The Application of) v Cambridgeshire County Council SC 31-May-2012
The respondent had assessed the claimant’s annual care needs. He challenged the calculations. The authority had a system which calculated the average needs for support adding a sum to reflect particular critical need. An independent expert had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425594

Perotti v City of Westminster: CA 17 May 2005

Whether a transcript of judge’s decision was to be provided by the court before the appeal particulars were filed.
Held: A litigant in person was not entitled to have produced for him a free transcript of the judgment against which he sought to appeal. The applicant said he could not produce his grounds of appeal until he had seen the transcript, and the judge had ordered that no transcript could be provided without the appellant first providing his grounds of appeal. Mr Perotti had himself taken a tape recording of the judgment, and it was open to him to have himself made notes of the judgment as it was given or to ask the defendant if they would provide a copy. He had not done so.

Judges:

Brooke LJ VP, Mance LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 581, Times 30-May-2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Litigation Practice

Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.224923

Regina v Further Education Funding Council, ex parte Robert Parkinson; Regina v Bradford Metropolitan District Council, ex parte Robert Parkinson: Admn 18 Oct 1996

Further education under special needs provisions for an adult are to be tailored to his particular needs.

Citations:

Times 31-Oct-1996, [1996] EWHC Admin 130

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Higher Education Act 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Education, Local Government

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.136678

Hertfordshire County Council v Veolia Water Central Ltd: CA 27 Jul 2010

The council sought under section 81 the cost of having had to place bollards over a manhole cover owned by the defendant. The cover was said to have been cracked leading to injury, and temporary arrangements had been made for its safety. The judge had found the works to be emergency works within section 52.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The section and regulation were to be given a purposive interptretation to avoid absurdity. Regulation 4 should not be read so as to refer only to regulation 3 inspections. It was not appropriate to require the authority to contact the owner of the cover before doing any works.

Judges:

Pill, Hughes, Stanley Burnton LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 887, [2010] WLR (D) 200

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 52 81, Street Works (Maintenance) Regulations 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Keating v Elvan Reinforced Concrete Co Ltd 1968
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Utilities, Local Government

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.421074

Breckland District Council and others v The Boundary Committee and Another: Admn 28 Nov 2008

The councils sought to challenge the re-organisation of their boundaries. The proposal could result in their abolition and the introduction of a unitary system of local government in that county, extending to part of Suffolk.
Held: Parliament had imposed on the Boundary Committee, an expert and politically neutral body directly within Parliament’s remit, an obligation of meaningful consultation about any proposal it might consider advancing on local government reorganisation. However the consultation process could be staged so that consultation on the affordability of a proposal did not have to be undertaken simultaneously with consultation on the other relevant criteria identified by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. Those other criteria are a broad cross section of support, strong and effective leadership, neighbourhood flexibility and empowerment, and value for money and equity with public services.

Judges:

Cranston J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2929 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – East Devon District Council v Electoral Commission (the Boundary Committee for England) Admn 8-Jan-2009
The Council sought to challenge proposals by the Commission for re-organisation of its boundaries. The Secretary of State had asked the Commission to see if there was any proposal which might lead to a unified authority but which also met the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.278305

Regina (Hargrave and Another) v Stroud District Council: CA 22 Jul 2002

The applicants had sought to vary a footpath to move it further away from their house. The parish council objected. The council had decided that it would be expedient under the Act to divert it, but went on to decide against a diversion and against referring the decision to the Secretary of State. The land owner appealed a decision upholding the council’s decision
Held: The Act left discretions with the Local Authority, both as to whether to order the footpath to be diverted and as to whether the question was to be referred to the Secretary of State, even after it had decided that it would be expedient to move it. It had no duty to make the order particularly where there were sustained objections.

Judges:

Schiemann LJ, Buxton LJ and Longmore LJ

Citations:

Times 05-Aug-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1281, [2003] JPL 351, [2003] 1 P and CR 1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 119

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (Hargrave and Another) v Stroud District Council Admn 7-Dec-2001
When someone objected to a public footpath order, the council has a discretion as to whether the case should be referred to the Secretary of State. In the absence of an obligation, the judicial review of the council’s decision not to make such a . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Regina (Hargrave and Another) v Stroud District Council Admn 7-Dec-2001
When someone objected to a public footpath order, the council has a discretion as to whether the case should be referred to the Secretary of State. In the absence of an obligation, the judicial review of the council’s decision not to make such a . .
Cited – Regina (Ashbrook) v East Sussex County Council CA 20-Nov-2002
The claimant complained that the respondent had failed properly to secure removal of an admitted obstruction to a public footpath. The landowner had applied for a diversion of the footpath, which the respondent recommended for adoption, but the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Local Government, Land

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.174698

Flanagan and Another v South Bucks District Council: CA 16 May 2002

The authority had commenced planning enforcement proceedings. At the hearing, agreement was reached between the defendant and the authority’s representative, and the proceedings were compromised. The authority itself later sought to set aside the compromise claiming that its officer had acted outside his power.
Held: The officer had power to compromise the proceedings in which he acted, but did not have power to withdraw the enforcement notice itself. No legitimate expectation had been created, and the doctrine of estoppel, which is a matter of private law, has no place in public planning law.

Judges:

Lord Justice Keene and Mr Justice Sumner

Citations:

Gazette 20-Jun-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 690, [2002] 1 WLR 2601

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Bloggs 61, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 18-Jun-2003
The applicant sought review of a decision to remove him from a witness protection scheme within the prison. He claimed that having been promised protection, he had a legitimate expectation of protection, having been told he would receive protection . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Local Government, Estoppel

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.172228

Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Westminster City Council: SC 19 Jul 2017

The claimant challenged fees which were charged to the respondents on applying to Westminster City Council for sex shop licences for the three years ended 31 January 2011, 2012 and 2013 and which included the council’s costs of enforcing the licensing scheme against unlicensed third parties running sex shops (‘enforcement costs’). The respondents’ applications all in the event succeeded, and I can call them ‘the licence holders’.
Held: During the year at issue, the fault as only in requiring a contribution to the costs of running the scheme at the time of the application for the licence. A similar fee at the time of the grant of a licence was not invalid. The balance as remitted to the Administrative court.
‘The scheme which the council operated was only defective in so far as it required payment up front at the time of the application. Its invalidity was limited. Contrary to the respondents’ case, European law permits a fee to cover the costs of running and enforcing the licensing scheme becoming due upon the grant of a licence. There is no imperative under European law, as incorporated domestically by the 2009 Regulations, to treat the whole scheme as invalid, rather than to invalidate it to the extent of the inconsistency’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 50, [2017] WLR(D) 553, [2018] AC 676, [2017] 3 WLR 342, [2017] PTSR 1020, UKSC 2013/0146

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 20170511 am Video

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, Provision of Services Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2999)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At CA – Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Mayor and Citizens of Westminster CA 24-May-2013
The claimant had submitted an application for a licence to operate a sex shop. On its failure it sought repayment of that part of the fee which related to the costs of supervising the system, rather than the costs of dealing with the application. It . .
At SC (1) – Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Westminster City Council SC 29-Apr-2015
The parties disputed the returnability of the fees paid on application for a sex establishment licence where the licence was refused. The fee was in part one for the application, and a second and greater element related to the costs of monitoring . .
At ECJ – Hemming and Others v Westminster City Council and Others ECJ 16-Nov-2016
Charges for processing application for licence
ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom to provide services – Directive 2006/123/EC – Article 13(2) – Authorisation procedures – Concept of charges which may be incurred . .
Cited – Lady and Kid A/S, Direct Nyt ApS, A/S Harald Nyborg Isenkram-og Sportsforretning, KID-Holding A/S v Skatteministeriet ECJ 6-Sep-2011
Refusal to reimburse a tax paid in error – Unjust enrichment arising from the link between the introduction of that tax and the abolition of other taxes . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Hutchinson; Director of Public Prosecutions v Smith HL 12-Jul-1990
Protesters objected that byelaws which had been made to prevent access to common land, namely Greenham Common were invalid.
Held: The byelaws did prejudice the rights of common. The House was concerned to clarify the test applicable when . .
Cited – Lady and Kid A/S, Direct Nyt ApS, A/S Harald Nyborg Isenkram-og Sportsforretning, KID-Holding A/S v Skatteministeriet ECJ 7-Dec-2010
ECJ (Opinion) Taxes do not conform to National Union law – Repayment – Refusal – Repercussion – Unjust enrichment – Compensation for illegal tax by the simultaneous removal of other statutory charges – Internal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, European, Local Government

Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.590446

Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others v Westminster City Council: Admn 16 May 2012

The applicant had sought a license for a sex establishment. He paid the (substantial) fee, but complained that the Council had not as required, resolved to set the fee, and that in any event, the sum did not reflect the cost of administering the system.
Held: The claim succeeded. The council’s Licensing Sub-Committee had failed to determine any yearly fee after 7 September 2004 (when it determined the fee for the year ended 31 January 2005 and no more) until 5 January 2012 (when it determined the fee for the year ended 31 January 2013). All that had happened in the intervening years was that the council’s officers had simply assumed that the same fee as set on 7 September 2004 continued to apply and had charged licence applicants accordingly.

Judges:

Keith J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1260 (Admin), [2012] PTSR 1676

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, Provision of Services Regulations 2009, Directive 2006/123/EC on Services in the Internal Market

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Birmingham City Council ex parte Quietlynn Ltd 1985
The court held that on the failure of an application for a licence for a sex establishment, that part of the licence fee paid which related to the management of the supervisory regime rather than the cost of administering the application alone . .
Cited – Regina v Westminster City Council, ex parte Hutton 1985
H challenged the fee set for applying for a livence to operate a sex shop. The administrative costs on which the fee was based in the year in question included a sum representing the supposed shortfall in fee income against administrative costs in . .
Cited – Regina v Manchester City Council ex parte King QBD 1991
When setting licence fees for local traders, the authority had set them at a commercial rate. ‘the judgment of what was a reasonable fee ‘for the purpose of recouping in whole or in part the cots of operating the street trading scheme’ was for . .
Cited – Waikato Regional Airport Ltd and others v Attorney General PC 30-Jun-2003
PC New Zealand . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Mayor and Citizens of Westminster CA 24-May-2013
The claimant had submitted an application for a licence to operate a sex shop. On its failure it sought repayment of that part of the fee which related to the costs of supervising the system, rather than the costs of dealing with the application. It . .
At First Instance – Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Westminster City Council SC 29-Apr-2015
The parties disputed the returnability of the fees paid on application for a sex establishment licence where the licence was refused. The fee was in part one for the application, and a second and greater element related to the costs of monitoring . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Local Government

Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.457760

Devon County Council and Another v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government: Admn 21 Jun 2010

The court was asked to consider the decision to merge two health authorities. Ouseley J discussed what need to be made available to support the consultation: ‘What needs to be published about the proposal is very much a matter for the judgment of the person carrying out the consultation to whose decision the courts will accord a very broad discretion . . But, in my judgment, sufficient information to enable an intelligible response requires the consultee to know not just what the proposal is in whatever detail is necessary, but also the factors likely to be of substantial importance to the decision, or the basis on which the decision is likely to be taken . . a flawed consultation exercise is not always so procedurally unfair as to be unlawful; R (Greenpeace) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry [2007]Env LR 29, Sullivan J . . the true test is whether the consultation process was so unfair that it was unlawful . .’

Judges:

Ouseley J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 1456 (Admin), [2011] BLGR 64, [2010] ACD 83

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007

Citing:

Cited – Greenpeace Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Admn 15-Feb-2007
The claimant sought to challenge the defendant’s report on the future use of nuclear power, saying that the consultation process had been flawed.
Held: Procedural unfairness may not be so serious as to undermine the decision itself. Sullivan J . .

Cited by:

Cited – Save Our Surgery Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Joint Committee of Primary Care Trusts Admn 7-Mar-2013
The claimants sought judicial review of the report prepared by the defendants under which departments providing childrens’ heart surgery at their regional hospital would close. They complained that the consultation had been inadequate and flawed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government

Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.417088

Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Westminster City Council: SC 29 Apr 2015

The parties disputed the returnability of the fees paid on application for a sex establishment licence where the licence was refused. The fee was in part one for the application, and a second and greater element related to the costs of monitoring the system overall. The Counicl argued that their refusal was not a breach of the 2006 Directive.
Held: The court rejected the first way that the Council put its case. Article 13(2) is only concerned with authorisation procedures and formalities at the stage when a person is seeking permission to access or exercise a service activity. That is its natural meaning, read with the definition of ‘authorisation scheme’ in article 4. Article 13(2) is not concerned with fees which may be required to be paid (eg annually) for the possession, retention or renewal of a licence, once the authorisation stage is satisfactorily past. The ‘charges which the applicants may incur from their application’ to which article 13(2) refers cannot sensibly embrace fees of this nature payable by successful applicants for the licence or its retention or renewal after the authorisation stage.
However, the remaining questions did reuire reference to the European Court. They were: ‘(1) whether the requirement to pay a fee including the second refundable part means, as a matter of law and without more, that the respondents incurred a charge from their applications which was contrary to article 13(2) in so far as it exceeded any cost to Westminster City Council of processing the application, or
(2) whether a conclusion that such a requirement should be regarded as involving a charge – or, if it is so to be regarded, a charge exceeding the cost to Westminster City Council of processing the application – depends on the effect of further (and if so what) circumstances, for example: (a) any evidence establishing that the payment of the second refundable part involved or would be likely to involve an applicant in some cost or loss, (b) any saving in the costs to Westminster City Council of processing applications (and so in their non-refundable cost) that would result from requiring an up-front fee consisting of both parts to be paid by all applicants.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson

Citations:

[2015] UKSC 25, [2015] BLGR 753, [2015] PTSR 643, [2015] WLR(D) 193, [2015] AC 1600, [2015] 3 CMLR 9, [2015] LLR 564, [2015] 2 WLR 1271, UKSC 2013/0146

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary

Statutes:

Provision of Services Regulations 2009, Directive 2006/123/EC on Services in the Internal Market

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Birmingham City Council ex parte Quietlynn Ltd 1985
The court held that on the failure of an application for a licence for a sex establishment, that part of the licence fee paid which related to the management of the supervisory regime rather than the cost of administering the application alone . .
Cited – Regina v Westminster City Council, ex parte Hutton 1985
H challenged the fee set for applying for a livence to operate a sex shop. The administrative costs on which the fee was based in the year in question included a sum representing the supposed shortfall in fee income against administrative costs in . .
Cited – Regina v Manchester City Council ex parte King QBD 1991
When setting licence fees for local traders, the authority had set them at a commercial rate. ‘the judgment of what was a reasonable fee ‘for the purpose of recouping in whole or in part the cots of operating the street trading scheme’ was for . .
At First Instance – Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others v Westminster City Council Admn 16-May-2012
The applicant had sought a license for a sex establishment. He paid the (substantial) fee, but complained that the Council had not as required, resolved to set the fee, and that in any event, the sum did not reflect the cost of administering the . .
Appeal from – Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Mayor and Citizens of Westminster CA 24-May-2013
The claimant had submitted an application for a licence to operate a sex shop. On its failure it sought repayment of that part of the fee which related to the costs of supervising the system, rather than the costs of dealing with the application. It . .

Cited by:

At SC (1) – Hemming (T/A Simply Pleasure) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Westminster City Council SC 19-Jul-2017
The claimant challenged fees which were charged to the respondents on applying to Westminster City Council for sex shop licences for the three years ended 31 January 2011, 2012 and 2013 and which included the council’s costs of enforcing the . .
Reference – Hemming and Others v Westminster City Council and Others ECJ 16-Nov-2016
Charges for processing application for licence
ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom to provide services – Directive 2006/123/EC – Article 13(2) – Authorisation procedures – Concept of charges which may be incurred . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Licensing, European

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.546149

Raphael, Regina (on The Application of) v Highbury Corner Magistrates Court: Admn 10 Jun 2010

Whether the licensing sub-committee of the London Borough of Islington had authority to decide a review of the applicant’s nightclub licence.

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 1502 (Admin), [2010] BLGR 896, [2011] PTSR 152

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing, Local Government

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.420421

Wilson v Ashford Borough Council: Admn 9 Mar 2010

The defendant appealed against an order for costs made against her after service and enforcement of an abatement notice with respect to an audible intruder alarm at her premises. She had first lodged an appeal to the Crown Court, but argued that having abandoned it more than three days before the hearing it had been wrong to make the costs order.
Held: The appeal failed. The Crown Court rule providing agaoinst the making of a costs order where the appeal was abandoned was subject expressly to the power givenn to the Magistrates under section 109. ‘The Magistrates were bound to consider the application for costs under section 109 on its merits and in my judgment were right to reject the submission that legitimate expectation or abuse of process should have caused them to reject the application in limine.’

Judges:

Leveson LJ, Cranston J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 639 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990, Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 109, Crown Court Rules 11 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Crown Court at Knightsbridge ex parte Commission of Custom and Excise QBD 1986
The defendant had appealed against his conviction to the Crown Court, but then given notice under rule 11 of his abandonment of the appeal. A few months later a Crown Court judge allowed an application for its re-instatement.
Held: The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Local Government

Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408635

Regina (J) v Caerphilly County Borough Council: QBD 12 Apr 2005

The claimant sought a declaration that the council had failed in its duty to provide him with an independent personal adviser. The council had appointed the same person to act as his personal adviser and also to prepare the statutory assessment and plan for his transition from care.
Held: The Regulations envisaged the officer preparing the plan to take account of the views of the personal adviser. That demosntrated that the rules envisaged two people. To join the roles was not desirable. The adviser’s role was to act as advocate for the child in his dealings with the authority, and that role would be compromised if he was also invloved with the statutory plan.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

Times 21-Apr-2005, [2005] EWHC 586 (Admin), [2005] 2 FLR 860

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children (Leaving Care) Act 2000, Children (Leaving Care) Regulations 2001 (2001 No 2189)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – G, Regina (on the Application of) v Nottingham City Council Admn 1-Feb-2008
The respondent authority had removed the child from the mother at birth but without first obtaining any court authority. The court had made a peremptory order for the return of the child. The court explained its actions.
Held: Neither social . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Local Government

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.224372

Sagnata Investments Ltd v Norwich Corporation: CA 1971

The court hear an appeal to quarter sessions against a licensing decision taken by a local authority. The application was rejected by the local authority against whose decision an appeal lay to the Quarter Sessions. The Recorder allowed the appeal and the City Corporation appealed to the Court of Appeal
Held: (Majority) Where an appellate court or tribunal has to reach its own decision, after hearing evidence, it does not, in general, simply start afresh and disregard the decision under appeal.
A public authority may set general policy governing its approach so long as its practice admits of exceptions and it does not suit its ears to claims that grounds for an exception exist in a particular case.
Lord Denning (dissenting) considered that the local authority was entitled to its opinion that it was socially undesirable to have such arcades in Norwich and that the recorder was wrong to substitute his view for those of the elected body responsible for making such decisions.
Edmund Davies LJ, at page 633, quoted Lord Denning in the course of argument as summarising the issue in this way:
‘Is the hearing to be treated as a new trial to be determined on evidence de novo, without being influenced by what the local authority has done; or is the hearing to be treated as an appeal proper, in which the local authority’s decision is to be regarded as of considerable weight, and is not to be reversed unless their decision is shown to be wrong?’
Edmund Davies LJ considered that this was a false antithesis. From the reasons which he gave for preferring an intermediate position, he must have understood the second of Lord Denning’s alternatives (‘an appeal proper’) as confined to deciding whether the local authority’s decision was wrong in law on the material before it. He went on to say, at page 636:
‘The provision for an appeal to quarter sessions seems to me largely, if not entirely, ‘illusory’ if the contention of the appellant council is right. If it is, I am at a loss to follow how the recorder set about discharging his appellate functions. Lacking all information as to what had happened before the local authority, save the bare knowledge that they had refused the application and their written grounds for refusal, he would be powerless, as I think, to make any effective examination of the validity of those reasons.’
Edmund Davies LJ expressed his conclusion as follows:
‘ . . I hold that the proceedings before this recorder were by way of a complete rehearing.
But, contrary to what has been contended, this conclusion does not involve that the views earlier formed by the local authority have to be entirely disregarded by quarter sessions. It is true that in Godfrey v Bournemouth Corporation [1969] 1 WLR 47, after observing that an appeal to quarter sessions under schedule 6 to this same Act was by way of a complete rehearing, Lord Parker CJ said, at p 52, ‘the discretion is a discretion which the recorder in the present case had to arrive at himself uninfluenced by what the local authority had done’. But with respect, I do not accept this. It went much too far, it was in direct conflict with the view which Lord Parker had earlier expressed in R v Essex Quarter Sessions, ex parte Thomas [1966] 1 WLR 359-363, it was contrary to the approach adopted both by the recorder and by Lord Parker CJ himself in the instant case, and it was, with deference, an uncalled-for observation. Here again, Stepney Borough Council v Joffe [1949] 1 KB 599 establishes what I regard as the proper approach, for, having made the point that there was in that case an unrestricted appeal, Lord Goddard CJ continued at pp 602, 603:
‘That does not mean to say that the court of appeal, in this case the metropolitan magistrate, ought not to pay great attention to the fact that the duly constituted and elected local authority have come to an opinion on the matter, and ought not lightly, of course, to reverse their opinion. It is constantly said (although I am not sure that it always sufficiently remembered) that the function of a court of appeal is to exercise its powers when it is satisfied that the judgment below is wrong, not merely because it is not satisfied that the judgment was right.’
Phillimore LJ’s judgment was to similar effect.

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Edmund Davies and Phillimore LJJ

Citations:

[1971] 2 QB 614

Statutes:

Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hesham Ali (Iraq) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 16-Nov-2016
The appellant, an Iraqi national had arrived in 2000 as a child, and stayed unlawfully after failure of his asylum claim. He was convicted twice of drugs offences. On release he was considered a low risk of re-offending. He had been in a serious . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Local Government

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.631411

Chegwyn, Regina (on The Application of) v Standards Board for England: Admn 15 Feb 2010

The claimant appealed against a disqualification imposed on him from becoming a local counsillor.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 471 (Admin), [2010] BLGR 614

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government Act 2000 78B(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government

Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.402728

West Sussex County Council v Russell: CA 12 Feb 2010

The council appealed against a finding that it had failed in its duty to keep the highway safe leading to an accident in which the claimant was severely injured. The road was narrow, and a significant drop had developed by the edge of the road. The claimant drove into the drop, then crashed after swerving to restore herself to the road.
Held: The authority’s appeal failed. The verge was part of the roadway, but was clearly marked off. ‘notwithstanding the terminology of the subsection and the occasional reference in the authorities to the ‘absolute’ nature of liability thereunder, the liability was less than to guarantee the safety of the highway for all users.’ This was a rural road, and the drop would not have been dangerous for drivers using it as intended. It was a hazard only to those speeding. Section 58(2)(a) might have provided an answer for the authority, but it had accepted the fault by remedying the road. The difference in height of six inches between the road surface and a grass verge was a potential hazard to users of the road and presented a danger, such that the defendant was in breach of its duty under Section 41 of the 1980 Act.

Judges:

Arden LJ, Wilson LJ, Henderson J

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 71, [2010] RTR 19

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 41(1) 58(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Burnside v Emerson CA 1968
A car crashed as a result of running into a pool of storm-water lying across the road. The pool had been caused by the authority’s failure properly to maintain the drainage system, which had become blocked.
Held: The claim succeeded. Diplock . .
Cited – Jones v Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council CA 15-Jul-2008
The claimant, a fireman, sought damages for injuries suffered when he was injured answering a call out. He fell into a depressed area by the road side as he was pulling away a burning wooden pallet.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The court . .
Cited – Rider v Rider CA 1973
Sachs LJ stated that ‘it is in my judgment clear that the corporation’s statutory duty under section 44 of the Act of 1959 is reasonably to maintain and repair the highway so that it is free of danger to all users who use that highway in the way . .
Cited – Kind v Newcastle-Upon-Tyne Council Admn 31-Jul-2001
The appellant complained that the local council had failed to maintain a highway. The road was a single track rural highway. The Crown Court allowed for the present-day character of the highway, and the appellant objected. The complainant sought to . .

Cited by:

Cited – King Lifting Ltd v Oxfordshire County Council QBD 20-Jul-2016
A heavy crane had toppled from a road. The crane owners said that the highway authority were responsible for the poor condition of the road.
Held: The action failed. The evidence did not support the assertion that the accident arose from a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Local Government, Road Traffic

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.396739

MT, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Hillingdon: CA 21 Jan 2010

Renewed application for permission to appeal against the refusal to grant permission to the applicant, MT, to apply for judicial review of a decision made by the London Borough of Hillingdon.

Judges:

Rimer LJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 35

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Children, Immigration

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396705