||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 256 (Oct)
||Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
||Paul Bowen (instructed by John Ford) for the claimant.
||James Presland (instructed by Head of Legal Services, Haringey) for the defendant in the first application.
||Rebecca Haynes (instructed by Capsticks) for the defendant in the second application.
||21 October 2005
Local authority - Social services - Powers - Provision of respite care - Respite care amounting to medical needs - Whether local authority having power to provide respite care needed - , s 17, - Chronically Sick and Disabled Person Act 1970, ss 2, 28A.
In the circumstances, the respite care in question, to be provided to the claimants, had not fallen within either s17 and Sch2 to the or ss2 and 28A of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Person Act 1970 such as to give the defendant in the first application, the relevant social services authority, either the power to provide it or the legal duty to do so. However, in the instant case, while the defendant in the second application, performing its NHS health functions, had the relevant power and target duties, no specific duties had crystallised and it had not acted unlawfully in deciding on the care which it had provided.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary