M and A v London Borough of Islington

M and A v London Borough of Islington

Section 27 of the Children Act 1989 does not apply to departments within a unitary authority. The defendant's system for assessing and prioritising housing needs for disabled children, including risk management and interdepartmental co-operation, is lawful and satisfies statutory duties. The absence of a transfer for the claimants is not irrational or unlawful given the system's operation and the evidence of ongoing assessment and prioritisation.

Parties
Claimant: M; Claimant: A; Defendant: London Borough of Islington
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Local Authority Duties, Children in Need, Housing Allocation, Co Operation Between Departments, Judicial Review Standards
Administrative Law Housing Law Children Law Local Authority Duties Children in Need Housing Allocation Co Operation Between Departments Judicial Review Standards

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Claimant

A

Claimant

London Borough of Islington

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does Section 27 of the Children Act 1989 apply to departments within a unitary authority?
  2. 2 Has the defendant lawfully discharged its duties to safeguard and promote the welfare of the claimants under the Children Act 1989 and 2004?
  3. 3 Is the defendant's housing allocation system compliant with statutory and guidance requirements for children in need?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 27 of the Children Act 1989 does not apply to departments within a unitary authority. The defendant's system for assessing and prioritising housing needs for disabled children, including risk management and interdepartmental co-operation, is lawful and satisfies statutory duties. The absence of a transfer for the claimants is not irrational or unlawful given the system's operation and the evidence of ongoing assessment and prioritisation.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed