The claimants who all suffered disability complained of the withdrawal by the respondent of its Passenger Transport Unit, which had provided support to them in attending local day care facilities.
Held: The request for judicial review failed. Davies J described the statutory scheme: ‘It is common ground that the defendant is obliged under section 29 of the National Assistance Act 1948 and s.2 CDSPA [the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970], where it is satisfied that it is necessary in order to meet the welfare needs of eligible adults living in their area, to make arrangements for the provision of welfare services. Thus in this case the defendant has made arrangements for the claimants, and the other disabled adults affected by the decision, to attend adult day centres and social care respite centres.
It is also common ground that in such circumstances the defendant is also obliged under s.2(1)(d) CSDPA to ‘make arrangements for . . the provision . . of facilities for, or assistance in, travelling to and from his home for the purpose of participating in any services provided under arrangements made by the authority’.
The defendant submits, and the claimants accept, rightly in my view, that the obligation is to make arrangements for facilities or assistance to be provided, and that this imports no obligation to provide facilities or assistance directly. The provision of facilities or assistance by other means, such as by entering into appropriate contracts with private organisations, or arranging for the eligible adult or his carer to provide his own transport, where appropriate with financial assistance, is permitted.’
Davies HHJ
[2014] EWHC 3481 (Admin)
Bailii
Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 2, National Assistance Act 1948 29
Cited by:
Appeal from – Robson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Salford City Council CA 20-Jan-2015
The appellants, all severely disabled appealed against the refusal of their judicial review of the substantial withdrawal by the Council of a service providing them with transport to local day care facilities. They said that the council had failed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Local Government, Discrimination
Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.537986