England and Wales Case Law

Michael Sherratt, R (on the application of) v Bolton Council

The Defendant's approach to DRE was unduly restrictive and inconsistent with statutory guidance and its own policy. The claim would have succeeded on its legal merits. The Claimant is entitled to costs as the outcome achieved by consent reflected the relief sought in the claim, and the Defendant had ample opportunity to avoid costs but failed to do so.

Source excerpt

• Disability related expenditure
• Care and support assessment
• Judicial review procedure
• Costs orders

Read case analysis

Sherratt, R (on the application of) v Bolton Council

Sherratt, R (on the application of) v Bolton Council [2024] EWHC 699 (Admin) (27 March 2024)

Judicial review costs determination after a consent withdrawal over disability-related expenditure in a care-charge assessment. The court ordered the council to pay the claimant’s costs.

• Disability related expenditure
• Care and support assessment
• Judicial review procedure
• Costs orders
• Judicial-review
• Social-care

Read case analysis

AR, Re

AR, Re [2018] EWCOP 8 (28 March 2018)

The Court of Protection held that generic ACO orders on deputy remuneration could not continue to be relied on and required case-by-case review.

• Deputyship remuneration
• Best interests decision-making
• Validity of court orders
• Disability related expenditure
• Practice direction 19b
• Review of deputy appointments

Read case analysis

AR, Re

The Court of Protection held that generic deputy remuneration orders for Mr Cawthorn could not stand, but approved his rate for AR on a best-interests basis.

• Deputy remuneration
• Best interests test
• Procedural irregularity
• Disability related expenditure
• Court-of-protection
• Mental-capacity

Read case analysis