2011 10 Adult Care

R (JG and MB) and Lancashire CC [2011] EWHC 2295 Admin (Kenneth Parker J): the local authority had acted lawfully in setting a reduced global budget for adult social care, in changing its FACS threshold to meet “substantial” and “critical” needs only and in increasing its charges. In particular, its budgetary decision had lawfully complied with section 49A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, because those involved had been aware that it was likely to adversely impact on disabled persons and because it did not tie the Council’s hands fiscally and was on the basis that any specific policy change would be subject to detailed consultation and impact assessment. In relation to the later, detailed consultation and impact assessment process, there was “simply no foundation” for the allegation that it had been inadequate. In addition, the Claimants had, improperly, filed and served a large amount of misconceived “financial evidence” and other unhelpful material shortly before the hearing. The case is an illuminating read for local authorities who want to see how another local authority has lawfully modified its adult social care policies.