Joshua Swirsky represented the local authority in the deprivation of liberty case of CGM v Luton Borough Council. The court found that if a local authority does not apply for an order under the inherent jurisdiction, a parent can challenge the deprivation of liberty of their child in a specialist school by bringing a writ of habeas corpus.
The Court of Appeal has confirmed that where a local authority makes a homelessness review decision late, that decision is valid notwithstanding its lateness.
Sarah Salmon and Joshua Swirsky discuss the case of R(MA) v LB Croydon in which they acted for the successful local authority.
The case reaffirms the right of a local authority in most circumstances to carry out an investigation before deciding whether to start a prosecution under s222 of the Local Government Act 1972. For claimants, the case stresses the need to show they have some identifiable interest in the remedy sought to have standing to bring judicial review proceedings.
Francis Hoar represents a solicitor who is seeking judicial review of the government’s hotel quarantine laws.
We are delighted to welcome Winsome Levy as a new tenant. Called to the Bar in 2003, Winsome specialises in Court of Protection, mental health tribunal, adult social care and inquest cases.
Sarah Salmon is acting for the London Borough of Hounslow in a High Court case to decide issues of principle in local authority claims for injunctions against ‘persons unknown’. The case could have much wider application as local authorities have used the same statutory provisions to seek injunctions against ‘persons unknown’ to restrain raves and car cruising (among other things).
Tony Harrop-Griffiths reviews this High Court case in which he represented Croydon LBC. The case considered whether a local authority has to assess a person’s needs under the Children Act 1989 when another local authority has found them to be an adult. This case raised issues about which authority should be responsible for the age and needs assessment process (and for providing any support in the meantime) when the person concerned has moved from one authority’s area to another.
This judgment discusses anticipatory deprivation of liberty orders in the context of prospective loss of capacity and the tension between respecting a young person’s autonomy and protecting them from harm when making best interest decisions.
Nikolas Clarke represented the local authority: its AMHP and Social Services department in an Article 2 jury inquest concerning SMV who died in April 2019. The jury gave a short narrative conclusion that did not find any causative factors.