Three learning-disabled residents of the charity’s Botton Village community had previously maintained that their Article 8 human rights had been infringed. They sought a Judicial Review of the charity’s actions but this was twice refused in the courts on the basis that their claim was not arguable. It is anticipated that the abandonment of their appeal will signal the end of the Judicial Review claim.

The chances of the claimants’ appeal being successful had always appeared limited. In his judgment of 15 April, (which was being appealed), Mr Justice Knowles clearly stated: ‘It is not arguable that Article 8 has been breached. It is my firm view it is in the interests of all concerned that this is appreciated now.’  His assessment was that it was “obvious now its unrealistic to examine the issue [of living arrangements] in isolation” from the “multi-dimensional context”.

Anthony Collins Solicitors and counsel Christopher Baker of Arden Chambers represented the charity.

Helen Tucker, Partner of Anthony Collins Solicitors, stated: “The Charity do not know why the appeal has been abandoned but are relieved it has been and that they no longer need to use their resources to defend this legal action”.

Separate Court action against the charity by campaigners claiming the trustees have acted ultra vires continues. The charity and the claimants are currently co-operating on the arrangements for legal mediation which will be held prior to a further administrative hearing expected in the summer.

For further information

For further information, please contact Kate Granger

Is £400m enough?
Is £400m enough?

The government announced on 16 May that it will provide a fund of £400m to cover the costs of removal and replacement of cladding to high rise residential blocks which have failed tests.

The problems with co-owned properties and attorneys
The problems with co-owned properties and attorneys

Whilst some people are under the impression that preparing a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) is simply a case of completing a form and ticking a few boxes, it is about far more than this.

What's mine is (not) yours!
What's mine is (not) yours!

A big fear for some people facing divorce and the inevitable carving up of the matrimonial assets. They seek assurances that such assets will be “ring-fenced” and retained for them.

How to avoid the PET trap
How to avoid the PET trap

When an individual is thinking about making a gift to another individual, consideration needs to be given to the Potentially Exempt Transfer (PET) trap.

Fictitious divorces
Fictitious divorces

Arising from the recent Family Division announcement, people who think they are legally divorced may in fact still be married.