A social worker arranged for L, a seriously troubled young person who had been evicted from her mother’s home, to live for a few days in an hotel.
Held: As she had previously been looked after by the local authority for some time, this would be sufficient for her to become a relevant child under section 20. The classification or definition of what was being done by the council at the time, particularly where there was no assessment and the relevant matters were not in mind, could not possibly be determinative as to what had occurred. The child was a child in need, there had been a continuous duty to accommodate her under section 20, and she was therefore a former relevant child.
Judges:
Burton J
Citations:
[2007] EWHC 2364 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – M, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham HL 27-Feb-2008
M, a girl aged 16 had become estranged from her mother, and sought housing assistance. She was not referred to the authority’s children’s services, and was not housed. The House examined the duties of local authorities under the section towards . .
Cited – G, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough Of Southwark HL 20-May-2009
The House was asked whether when a child of 16 or 17 who was ejected from home and presents himself to a local children’s services authority and asks to be accommodated by them under section 20 of the Children Act 1989, it is open to that authority . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children, Local Government
Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.260202
