Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The First-tier Tribunal upheld Ofsted’s decision to restrict new admissions at a supported accommodation provider, finding a material risk of significant harm and a proportionate intervention.
The Tribunal dismissed Mr Schumacher’s appeal against Ofsted’s refusal to register him as a children’s home manager, finding he was not fit under regulation 28.
The appeal was filed outside the 28-day statutory time limit set by s.21(2) Care Standards Act 2000. None of the appellant's reasons—including late receipt, lack of legal advice, misunderstanding of the time limit, or awaiting further information—amounted to exceptional circumstances. Therefore, the tribunal had no discretion to extend time, and the appeal could not be admitted.
Source excerpt
There is, as of the date of the hearing, reasonable cause to believe that children or young people accommodated by the Appellant may be exposed to a material risk of significant harm due to the conduct of Mr Ferguson, and the restriction imposed by Ofsted is objectively justified and proportionate in the circumstances.
Source excerpt
K, Re and Re R (Unregulated Placement : Authorisation Pursuant to the Court's Inherent Jurisdiction : Prohibition) [2022] EWHC 1890 (Fam) (08 July 2022)
The High Court held that an unregulated residential family centre placement could be directed under section 38(6) of the Children Act 1989, but not authorised through inherent jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction can authorise deprivation of a child’s liberty where secure accommodation is unavailable, subject to safeguards.
J (secure accommodation order - bespoke placement) [2020] EWFC B38 (01 September 2020)
The Family Court made a secure accommodation order for a 17-year-old in a bespoke Oxfordshire placement, finding the setup’s primary purpose was to restrict liberty.
Broadway Care Centre Ltd, R (on the application of) v Caerphilly County Borough Council [2012] EWHC 37 (Admin) (19 January 2012)
The High Court refused judicial review of a council’s termination of a care-home contract, holding it was a private law matter and the provider lacked standing for residents’ Convention claims.
Marshall v Commission for Social Care Inspection [2009] EWHC 1286 (Admin) (03 April 2009)
High Court appeal dismissed, holding that in an appeal against cancellation of care-home registration the appellant bore the burden of proving fitness and integrity.
Chandra v Care Standards Tribunal [2008] EWHC 2833 (Admin) (31 October 2008)
The High Court dismissed Dr Chandra’s appeal against a tribunal decision upholding cancellation and conditions on a care home registration for repeated regulatory failures.
Explore more
