Unison, R (on the application of) v Monitor & Ors [2009] EWHC 3221 (Admin) (09 December 2009)

Unison, R (on the application of) v Monitor & Ors [2009] EWHC 3221 (Admin) (09 December 2009)

Monitor's adoption of option 2 for defining 'income derived from private charges' under section 44 of the National Health Service Act 2006 was a rational and lawful exercise of its discretion. The statutory phrase 'derived from private charges' does not require the inclusion of all income ultimately traceable to private patient activity, as advocated by Unison. The court found that Monitor's approach, which includes income from subsidiaries, associates, and joint ventures but excludes more remote sources such as third-party provision and certain investments, is consistent with the statutory purpose and is not irrational or ultra vires.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 3221 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Unison; Defendant: Monitor; Interested Party: Secretary of State for Health; Interested Party: Foundation Trust Network
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation of NHS Act 2006 S.44, Regulation of NHS Foundation Trusts, Private Patient Income Cap, Public Sector Healthcare Policy
Administrative Law Health Law Statutory Interpretation Statutory Interpretation of NHS Act 2006 S.44 Regulation of NHS Foundation Trusts Private Patient Income Cap Public Sector Healthcare Policy

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 2 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Unison

Claimant

Monitor

Defendant

Secretary of State for Health

Interested Party

Foundation Trust Network

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct interpretation of 'income derived from private charges' in section 44 of the National Health Service Act 2006?
  2. 2 Was Monitor's adoption of 'option 2' for calculating the private patient income cap lawful?

Ratio Decidendi

Monitor's adoption of option 2 for defining 'income derived from private charges' under section 44 of the National Health Service Act 2006 was a rational and lawful exercise of its discretion. The statutory phrase 'derived from private charges' does not require the inclusion of all income ultimately traceable to private patient activity, as advocated by Unison. The court found that Monitor's approach, which includes income from subsidiaries, associates, and joint ventures but excludes more remote sources such as third-party provision and certain investments, is consistent with the statutory purpose and is not irrational or ultra vires.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed