Council does not have ongoing duty to fund care package forever, Appeal Court rules

The Court of Appeal has upheld a judgment refusing to allow judicial review proceedings to go ahead against a council’s decision to stop funding a care package.

In R (Manchester City Council) v St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council [2009] WLR (D) 319, the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal brought by Manchester City Council against Mrs Justice Dobbs’ judgement on 12 December 2008.

The judge had refused to allow Manchester to bring judicial review proceedings against a decision by St Helens to stop funding the care package of PE, a 36-year old individual with a multiple personality disorder who required high-level care. That package was originally funded by St Helens.

After PE moved of her own choice to Manchester in 1999, St Helens carried out an assessment pursuant to section 47 of the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990 and continued to meet the cost of the care package. However in September 2005, St Helens initiated best interest proceedings in the Family Division. The experts agreed PE should continue with the residential care package, but with responsibility moving from St Helens to Manchester.

Manchester defended attempts to pass responsibility to them and declined to manage the case, arguing that PE was not ordinarily resident in its area. An application under section 32(3) of the National Assistance Act 1948 ensued. The secretary of state decided that PE was ordinarily a resident in Manchester and had been so since April 2000. St Helens consequently stopped the funding.

Queen’s Bench Division President Sir Anthony May accepted St Helens’ submission that they were not under a duty to continue to make arrangements and that Manchester were under the statutory duty under section 29(1) of the National Assistance Act 1948.

The judge held that the exercise of that power did not give rise to an ongoing duty to fund forever. St Helens did not have to establish a change of circumstances in the context of a public law duty. A local authority could withdraw funding subject to considerations of rationality and legitimate expectation.

Lord Justice Scott Baker agreed and Lord Justice Lloyd delivered a concurring judgment.