Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
The need for proportionality and the ‘Covid impact’
Simon Wilkinson, Parklane PlowdenThe Covid-19 pandemic has infiltrated every aspect of our lives. Within the courts and tribunals service there has been a plethora of guidance since March 2020 which...
Local authority input into private law proceedings, part II
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingsLucy Logan Green, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingThis article considers the interplay between private and public law proceedings, focusing on the law relating...
Time for change (II)
Lisa Parkinson, Family mediation trainer, co-founder and a Vice-President of the Family Mediators AssociationThe family law community needs to respond to the urgent call for change from the...
How Can I Wed Thee? – Let Me Change the Ways: the Law Commission’s Consultation Paper on ‘Weddings’ Law (2020)
Professor Chris Barton, A Vice-President of the Family Mediators Association, Academic Door Tenant, Regent Chambers, Stoke-on-TrentThis article considers the Paper's 91 Consultation Questions...
Consultation on the proposed transfer of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of costs to the Legal Aid Agency
The Ministry of Justice has launched a consultation on the proposed transfer from Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service to the Legal Aid Agency of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of...
View all articles
Authors

LOCAL AUTHORITY: B v Southwark London Borough Council [2006] EWHC 2254 (Admin)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:38 PM
Slug : b-v-southwark-london-borough-council-2006-ewhc-2254-admin
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 18, 2006, 05:23 AM
Article ID : 89013

(Administrative Court; Andrew Nicol QC sitting as Deputy Judge; 18 September 2006)

Quashing a decision by the local authority not to provide further support under s 23C or s24A of the Children Act 1989, to a former relevant child whose appeal against removal on Art 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (European Convention) grounds had not yet been resolved, the judge held that, in the absence of a decision from the immigration authorities, the local authority could dismiss the claimant's objection to returning to Uganda only if it decided that the claimant's Art 8 of the European Convention application was manifestly unfounded. That had not been established by the authority enquiry. Reconsideration by the local authority would not necessarily lead to the same result. There was a continuing duty to provide a personal adviser and to review a pathway plan, even if the local authority was precluded from giving support or assistance, although the functions in each case would be very much truncated because of that restriction on the authority's powers.

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