East Midlands Care Ltd, R (on the application of) v Leicestershire County Council

East Midlands Care Ltd, R (on the application of) v Leicestershire County Council

The Council failed to properly ascertain and have due regard to the actual cost of care after the issue was raised by EMCARE, rendering the decision-making process fatally flawed. The Council also failed to conduct adequate consultation with care providers, and did not properly assess the risks to residents. These failures rendered the decision to freeze fees for 2011/2012 unlawful and it must be quashed.

Parties
Claimant: East Midlands Care Limited; Defendant: Leicestershire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; decision quashed
Legal Topics
Local Authority Duties, Fee Setting for Care Homes, Consultation Requirements, Actual Cost of Care, Equality Duty, Judicial Review Procedure
Administrative Law Social Care Law Public Law Local Authority Duties Fee Setting for Care Homes Consultation Requirements Actual Cost of Care Equality Duty +1 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 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

East Midlands Care Limited

Claimant

Leicestershire County Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council failed to properly consult care home providers before setting fee rates
  2. 2 Whether the Council failed to assess or take into account the actual cost of care
  3. 3 Whether the Council failed to assess risks to residents from a fee freeze

Ratio Decidendi

The Council failed to properly ascertain and have due regard to the actual cost of care after the issue was raised by EMCARE, rendering the decision-making process fatally flawed. The Council also failed to conduct adequate consultation with care providers, and did not properly assess the risks to residents. These failures rendered the decision to freeze fees for 2011/2012 unlawful and it must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; decision quashed

Orders

  • The decision of 7 March 2011 to freeze care home fees for 2011/2012 is quashed on grounds of failure to consult, failure to assess actual cost of care, and failure to assess risks to residents.