Parents launch judicial review over closure by London borough of three Early Years Centres

A group of parents have launched judicial review proceedings against Hillingdon Council over the closure of all the borough’s Early Years Centres.

The campaigners argue that the council’s use of special powers to close a service is unlawful, and that it “failed to carry out a statutory consultation”.

The families in Hillingdon received a letter in August telling them that all of Hillingdon’s Early Years Centres would be closing on 31 December 2022. 

The Borough would lose Uxbridge Early Years Centre, South Ruislip Early Years and Children’s Centre and Nestles Avenue Early Years and Children’s Centre, leaving 102 children without nursery places in the new year.

The council reportedly used what it called ‘special urgency rules’ to make the decision, which meant it was made without a public consultation or vote.

A group of residents has fought back against the closures by organising marches, protests and petitions, which led to the council announcing a ‘pause’ to the decision in order to hold a meeting to hear petitions against the closure. 

The council has said it would make a new decision on the closures but did not confirm when the decision would be made.

The judicial review claim challenges Hillingdon's decision to close the early years centres on five grounds:

1. The use of special urgency powers to close a service was unlawful – the decision was taken in breach of the council’s executive arrangements and was therefore in breach of section 9D of the Local Government Act 2000;
2. The council failed to carry out a statutory consultation in breach of section 5D of the Childcare Act 2006;
3. The council breached the public sector equality duty at section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 by failing to identify ways to mitigate against the negative impacts of the closures on children and failing to consider whether working mothers would be negatively impacted by the cessation of cheaper and more local childcare;
4. The council failed to promote and improve the well-being of children contrary to section 1 of the Childcare Act 2006 and section 11 of the Children Act 2004; and
5. The council unreasonably failed to make sufficient enquiries in relation to the financial implications of the decision.

Watkins and Gunn Solicitors are acting for the parents and children bringing the judicial review challenge. 

Senior Associate Solicitor Lucy O’Brien said: “Working parents are currently being faced with so many unprecedented challenges with the rapidly escalating costs of energy, fuel, food and housing, the last thing they need is the withdrawal of their only affordable childcare option.

“The council’s decision to close all of its Early Years provision has been catastrophic for some of these families, with many parents in Hillingdon not knowing if they will be able to carry on working after December. Legal proceedings are always a last resort, but in this case, efforts to persuade the council to keep the nurseries open have failed, and parents have no choice other than to turn to the Court.”

Hillingdon Council has been approached for comment.

Lottie Winson