London Secure Services Ltd, R (on the application of) v The Youth Justice Board

London Secure Services Ltd, R (on the application of) v The Youth Justice Board

The Youth Justice Board's decision to reduce the number of secure children's home beds and not to award contracts to Orchard Lodge and the Atkinson Unit was not unlawful. There was no clear and unambiguous representation to found a legitimate expectation, no irrationality in the assessment of demand or the treatment...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: London Secure Services Limited; Claimant: JV; Claimant: T; Defendant: Youth Justice Board; Defendant: Secretary of State for Justice; Interested Party: Department for Children, Schools and Families; Interested Party: Cornwall County Council; Interested Party: Devon County Council; Interested Party: Children’s Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Legitimate Expectation, Rationality, Human Rights (echr), Equality Impact Assessment, Consultation Duty, Youth Justice, Public Contracts
Administrative Law Public Procurement Human Rights Judicial Review Legitimate Expectation Rationality Human Rights (echr) Equality Impact Assessment +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

London Secure Services Limited

Claimant

JV

Claimant

T

Claimant

Youth Justice Board

Defendant

Secretary of State for Justice

Defendant

Department for Children, Schools and Families

Interested Party

Cornwall County Council

Interested Party

Devon County Council

Interested Party

Children’s Commissioner

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Youth Justice Board's decision not to award contracts for secure children's homes was unlawful on grounds of legitimate expectation, irrationality, breach of human rights, failure to consult, or failure to conduct equality impact assessments.

Ratio Decidendi

The Youth Justice Board's decision to reduce the number of secure children's home beds and not to award contracts to Orchard Lodge and the Atkinson Unit was not unlawful. There was no clear and unambiguous representation to found a legitimate expectation, no irrationality in the assessment of demand or the treatment of SCHs and STCs as broadly interchangeable, no breach of human rights, no statutory or fairness-based duty to consult, and no failure to comply with equality duties. The claimants failed to demonstrate any legal error or unfairness in the process or outcome.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to apply for judicial review granted
  • All grounds of challenge dismissed