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.’
Sir Anthony May PFD, Jackson and Tomlinson LJJ
 EWCA Civ 682, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 402
National Assistance Act 1948 29(1), Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970
England and Wales
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. . .
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 . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 March 2021; Ref: scu.440462