‘The dust is now beginning to settle, slightly, after the earthquake that was the decision of the Supreme Court in the conjoined appeals of Cheshire West and P and Q, which extends the criteria for determining whether living arrangements made for mentally incapacitated individuals amount to a deprivation of liberty.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 25th March 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘On 6 March Nick Boles announced the launch of the new Planning Practice Guidance (‘PPG’). The guidance has been in draft ‘Beta’ format since 28 August 2013. It follows a review of planning policy guidance undertaken by Lord Taylor of Goss Moor which began in October 2012. This note is intended to provide a brief overview of the guidance and some of its key features.’
No. 5 Chambers, 10th March 2014
Source: www.no5.com
‘The latest in a series of village green cases to reach the Supreme Court will be heard next week by a five-judge panel led by Lord Neuberger.’
Local Government Lawyer, 25th March 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
Supreme Court, 19th March 2014
‘Mentally incapacitated persons had the same rights to liberty as everyone else, and if their living arrangements would amount to a deprivation of liberty of a capacitous person they were also a deprivation of liberty of the incapacitated person, who was therefore entitled to periodic independent checks to ensure that the deprivation of liberty remained justified in his or her best interests.’
WLR Daily, 19th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Tim Baldwin comments on today’s Supreme Court judgment regarding the deprivation of liberty of people with disabilities.
This note concerns the case of P (by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor) (Appellant) v Cheshire West and Chester Council and another (Respondents); P and Q (by their litigation friend, the Official Solicitor)(Appellants) v Surrey County Council (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 19 handed down on the 19 March 2014.’
Garden Court Chambers Blog, 19th March 2014
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
‘A successful FTT bedroom tax appeal in Birkenhead has raised some new questions over ‘room use’ as an argument.’
NearlyLegal, 17th March 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Desmond Rutledge examines why the Court of Appeal in MA and Others refused to apply the reasoning in Burnip to disabled adults in the social sector who need an extra bedroom.’
Garden Court Chambers, 17th March 2014
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
Regina (Alansi) v Newham London Borough Council: [2013] EWHC 3722 (Admin); [2014] WLR (D) 117
‘The court’s approach to the interpretation of statements made by public bodies that were said to give rise to a legitimate expectation required it, inter alia, to ascertain the meaning which the authority’s statements would reasonably convey to the claimant in the light of all the background knowledge which he/she had in the situation in which she was at the time that the statements were made.’
WLR Daily, 27th November 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Mohamoud v Birmingham City Council: [2014] EWCA Civ 227; [2014] WLR (D) 119
‘The principle that a person conducting a review of a local housing authority’s decision as to what (if any) duty to provide accommodation it owed under section 193 of the Housing Act 1996 to an applicant could look at new matters to determine whether there was a “deficiency” in the decision for the purposes of regulation 8(2) of the Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Review Procedures) Regulations 1999 was not confined to points which the applicant could not have taken at the outset.’
WLR Daily, 7th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘This presentation considers the Prevention of Social Housing Fraud Act (―the Act‖), which came into force on 15 October 2013, from a practical perspective. A brief background to the Act will be set out below at paragraphs 3 to 7 along with the intended effects. There will then follow an examination of the provisions of the Act and an evaluation of its likely future impact and use, particularly on and by local authorities and housing associations.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 28th February 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘Associated Electrical Industries Ltd v Alstom UK [2014] EWHC 430 is the latest case to be handed down in the post Jackson/Mitchell dystopian legal world.’
NearlyLegal, 4th March 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Spencer Clarke, Lawyer in the Property, Family and Trust Law Team at the Law Commission considers the Key recommendations of the Law Commision’s Report on Matrimonial, Property, Needs and Agreements.’
Family Law Week, 27th February 2014
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has rejected on all grounds a claim that the cap on housing benefit amounted to unlawful discrimination against women.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 26th February 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Judge rejects accusations that the so-called ”bedroom tax” unlawfully discriminates against the disabled.’
Daily Telegraph, 21st February 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘A new First Tier Tribunal bedroom tax appeal decision from Liverpool, again a successful one, and this time on wholly new grounds.’
NearlyLegal, 18th February 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘A claimant has successfully challenged a council’s decision to uphold its reversal of a previous decision to disregard a property owned by her mother in calculating the mother’s ability to pay care home fees.’
Local Government Lawyer, 17th February 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘This sounds like a rather odd case, noted on the Garden Court bulletin. It is a refusal to grant permission for Judicial Review of a Council’s refusal to carry out a review of the method it had decided upon to discharge its full housing duty.’
NearlyLegal, 17th February 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Iain Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, could be forgiven for thinking that 2014 is not shaping up to be a great year for him. In the last month, the list of tribunal decisions freeing tenants from the so-called bedroom tax has been growing ever larger.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 12th February 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘A planning inspector’s decision to grant planning permission for a residential development with no affordable housing to prevent a delay in the contribution the development would make to the local authority’s housing land supply was rational and supported by sufficient reasons, a High Court judge has ruled.’
OUT-LAW.com, 13th February 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025