Supreme Court to hear battle among councils over 'ordinary residence' in care case

The Supreme Court will tomorrow hear a dispute involving four local authorities over the ‘ordinary residence’ of a severely disabled person lacking capacity.

The central issue in R (on the application of Cornwall Council) v Somerset County Council is the proper approach to the determination of a person's 'ordinary residence' within the meaning, and for the purposes, of Part III of the National Assistance Act 1948 ("the NAA"), where that person lacks capacity to decide where to live.

In this case the Secretary of State for Health – who was statutorily empowered to resolve the dispute – concluded that PH, the disabled individual, was ‘ordinarily resident’ in Cornwall when he turned 18.

If this were correct, Cornwall Council would have to cover the cost of providing the necessary care and other types of assistance throughout PH’s life. This is currently estimated at £80,000 a year.

Cornwall challenged the Secretary of State’s determination by way of judicial review.

Mr Justice Beatson rejected Cornwall’s challenge in the High Court. However, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and declared South Gloucestershire to be the ordinary place of residence at the relevant time.

Somerset County Council and Wiltshire Council are also involved in the case.

The case will be heard by Lady Hale, Lord Wilson, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes and Lord Toulson.

It will be heard over on 1.5 days on 18 and 19 March.

See also: ‘Ordinary residence’ revisited by the community care team at 39 Essex Chambers, setting out the background to the case and analysing the Court of Appeal ruling.