Social Work England v Rathbone [2022] EWHC 111 (Admin) (20 January 2022)

The extension is necessary and proportionate for public protection and maintaining public confidence, given the seriousness of allegations and delays beyond SWE's control.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2022] EWHC 111 (Admin)
Parties: Claimant: Social Work England; Defendant: Lee Rathbone
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 20 January 2022
Procedural Posture: Application for Extension of Interim Suspension Order / Hearing and Judgment
Outcome: Application granted
Legal Topics: Interim Suspension Orders, Social Workers Regulations 2018, Professional Misconduct, Public Interest

Administrative Law Professional Regulation Interim Suspension Orders Social Workers Regulations 2018 Professional Misconduct Public Interest

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Social Work England

Claimant

Lee Rathbone

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Interim Suspension Order / Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether a 9-month extension to the interim suspension order is necessary and proportionate
2 Whether the extension is justified for public protection and public confidence

Ratio Decidendi

The extension is necessary and proportionate for public protection and maintaining public confidence, given the seriousness of allegations and delays beyond SWE's control.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

9-month extension of interim suspension order to 27 October 2022

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.