FLETCHER, PETITION OF FRANK WILLIAM AS GUARDIAN IN PROPERTY AND FINANCIAL MATTERS OF LISA JOANNE SMART FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE FAILURE OF FIFE COUNCIL TO CARRY OUT THEIR STATUTORY DUTY UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE SOCIAL WORK (SCOTLAND) ACT 1968 [2015] ScotCS CSOH_183 (30 December 2015)
The Council complied with its statutory duties by assessing Lisa's needs and determining that her needs called for the provision of community care services, but as those needs were being met and means were available, it was appropriate to make no payment under section 12B. The Council did not err in law or act...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] ScotCS CSOH_183
- Parties
- Petitioner: Frank William Fletcher; Respondent: Fife Council
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 30 December 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / First Hearing and Final Judgment
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Community Care Services, Statutory Duties of Local Authorities, Assessment of Needs, Means Testing, Judicial Review, Adults With Incapacity (scotland) Act 2000, Social Work (scotland) Act 1968, Self Directed Support (scotland) Act 2013
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Frank William Fletcher
Petitioner
Fife Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / First Hearing and Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Fife Council failed to carry out its statutory duty under section 12A of the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968 in respect of Lisa Joanne Smart's community care needs
- 2 Whether the Council erred in law by considering the provision of services by third parties or the individual's means at the assessment stage
- 3 Whether the Council was required to make a payment under section 12B of the 1968 Act
Ratio Decidendi
The Council complied with its statutory duties by assessing Lisa's needs and determining that her needs called for the provision of community care services, but as those needs were being met and means were available, it was appropriate to make no payment under section 12B. The Council did not err in law or act irrationally in its decision-making process.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- Repel the pleas-in-law for the petitioner
- Sustain the second and fourth pleas-in-law for the respondents
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment