Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles
Authors

LOCAL AUTHORITY: R (TG) v Lambeth London Borough Council (Shelter Intervening) [2011] EWCA Civ 526

Sep 29, 2018, 17:44 PM
Slug : 2011EWCA526
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jul 13, 2011, 09:25 AM
Article ID : 95297

(Court of Appeal; Neuberger MR, Wilson and Toulson LJJ; 6 May 2011)

The local authority provided a young man with accommodation for about 7 months when he was 16/17.  The accommodation was provided by the housing services, but the authority conceded it probably should have been provided by the children's services under s 20 Children Act. The young man was guilty of repeated criminal behaviour.

The lack of coordination between the youth offending team, housing and children's services of the local authority had been positively unlawful. The appellant should have been accommodated under s20 Children Act and in the circumstances the actions of the youth offending team were properly to be imputed to children's services. The young man was declared a ‘former relevant child' but no damages were awarded.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from