M & Anor, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Lambeth & Ors

M & Anor, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Lambeth & Ors

The age determinations by the local authorities did not breach Article 6(1) ECHR as the right to accommodation under section 20 Children Act 1989 is not a civil right for Article 6 purposes, and judicial review provides adequate procedural safeguards. The question of whether an individual is a child for the purposes of section 17 and 20 is not a precedent fact for the court but for the local authority. Lambeth's departure from the AIT and Secretary of State's decisions on M's age was lawful as it had proper reasons and was not bound by those decisions.

Parties
Claimant 1: M; Claimant 2: A; Defendant 1: London Borough of Lambeth; Defendant 2: London Borough of Croydon; Interested Party: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Preliminary Determination of Legal Issues Prior to Final Hearing
Outcome
Claims dismissed on all preliminary issues; no breach of Article 6 or 8 ECHR; age assessment not a precedent fact; Lambeth's departure from AIT/SSHD decision lawful.
Legal Topics
Age Assessment, Children Act 1989, Article 6 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Judicial Review, Precedent Fact Doctrine, Procedural Fairness
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Child Law Age Assessment Children Act 1989 Article 6 ECHR Article 8 ECHR Judicial Review +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Claimant 1

A

Claimant 2

London Borough of Lambeth

Defendant 1

London Borough of Croydon

Defendant 2

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Preliminary Determination of Legal Issues Prior to Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether age determinations by local authorities breached Article 6 and/or Article 8 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the question of being a child under the Children Act 1989 is a precedent fact for the court
  3. 3 Whether Lambeth's departure from AIT and Secretary of State's decisions on M's age was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The age determinations by the local authorities did not breach Article 6(1) ECHR as the right to accommodation under section 20 Children Act 1989 is not a civil right for Article 6 purposes, and judicial review provides adequate procedural safeguards. The question of whether an individual is a child for the purposes of section 17 and 20 is not a precedent fact for the court but for the local authority. Lambeth's departure from the AIT and Secretary of State's decisions on M's age was lawful as it had proper reasons and was not bound by those decisions.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed on all preliminary issues; no breach of Article 6 or 8 ECHR; age assessment not a precedent fact; Lambeth's departure from AIT/SSHD decision lawful.