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 the conclusion of the court below on the care and attention issue, Laws LJ said: ‘The judge has, I think, understated the nature of the support provided by the local authority through Mr Wyman. As Mr Knafler submitted, Mr Wyman is doing something for the claimant which he cannot do for himself: he is monitoring his mental state so as to avoid if possible a relapse or deterioration. He is doing it, no doubt, principally through their weekly meetings; but also by means of the arrangements for contact (or the renewal of contact) with the two counselling groups, and with the befriender. It is to be noted that care and attention within the subsection is not limited to acts done by the local authority’s employees or agents. And I have already made it clear that the subsection does not envisage any particular intensity of support in order to constitute care and attention.
I acknowledge that the question is to some extent a matter of impression; and also that the claimant must show that the local authority’s determination was not open to a reasonable decision-maker . . But in my judgment that test is met. The support provided by the local authority to the claimant qualifies as care and attention.’
Judges:
Laws, Richards, Rimer LJJ
Citations:
[2011] EWCA Civ 954, [2011] HLR 48, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 601, [2012] 1 All ER 935, [2012] BLGR 137, [2012] PTSR 574
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – 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 . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – 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.
Benefits, Local Government
Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442693