Chatting, R (On the Application Of) v Viridian Housing & Anor [2012] EWHC 3595 (Admin) (13 December 2012)

Chatting, R (On the Application Of) v Viridian Housing & Anor [2012] EWHC 3595 (Admin) (13 December 2012)

The compromise agreement did not require Viridian Housing to personally provide accommodation and care to Miss Chatting, but only to ensure their provision; the transfer to Gold Care did not breach the agreement or Article 8 ECHR. Wandsworth Borough Council did not act unlawfully or fail in its statutory duties. The right to remain at Mary Court did not extend to circumstances where a lawful assessment determined that nursing care, which could not lawfully be provided at Mary Court, was required.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 3595 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Miss Florence Chatting; 1st Defendant: Viridian Housing; 2nd Defendant: London Borough of Wandsworth
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Interpretation of Consent Orders, Legitimate Expectation, Article 8 ECHR, National Assistance Act 1948, Mental Capacity Act 2005, Provision of Residential Care, Public Function Under Human Rights Act
Administrative Law Contract Law Human Rights Law Social Care Law Judicial Review Interpretation of Consent Orders Legitimate Expectation Article 8 ECHR +4 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Miss Florence Chatting

Claimant

Viridian Housing

1st Defendant

London Borough of Wandsworth

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Viridian Housing breached the compromise agreement by transferring care provision to Gold Care
  2. 2 Whether the transfer infringed Miss Chatting's Article 8 ECHR rights
  3. 3 Whether Wandsworth Borough Council failed to meet its statutory duties and best interests obligations under the National Assistance Act 1948 and Mental Capacity Act 2005

Ratio Decidendi

The compromise agreement did not require Viridian Housing to personally provide accommodation and care to Miss Chatting, but only to ensure their provision; the transfer to Gold Care did not breach the agreement or Article 8 ECHR. Wandsworth Borough Council did not act unlawfully or fail in its statutory duties. The right to remain at Mary Court did not extend to circumstances where a lawful assessment determined that nursing care, which could not lawfully be provided at Mary Court, was required.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Declarations sought by Miss Chatting refused
  • Declaration granted that the compromise agreement does not entitle Miss Chatting to remain at Mary Court if a lawful assessment finds she needs nursing care that cannot lawfully be provided there