Contracts for care upheld by court
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.COUNCILS have been given the green light to impose severe conditions in contracts with private residential care homes for the elderly since the implementation of the Community Care Act in April, as a result of a test case in the High Court this week.
Owners of a group of 25 homes in Newcastle upon Tyne sought a judicial review of the contract terms imposed by Newcastle City Council, arguing they were an abuse of the council's monopoly position.
Lawyers acting for the Newcastle Association of Care Homes argued that the contracts were either unreasonable or ultra vires (outside the council's legal powers).
But the judge, Mr Justice Auld, dismissed the application. He accepted the council's claim that the authority had a duty to the residents it financed to stay in the homes, and to the council taxpayers, to ensure high standards of service at an economical cost. He ruled that the council did not owe any duty to the homes.
The Newcastle homes owners are considering an appeal. Maggie Spofforth, their solicitor, said: 'There are many complex reasons why the contracts are considered unfair.
'For very minor reasons, something as small as a defective fire extinguisher, homes can effectively be shut down. The council can completely change the service that is to be provided.
'The imposition of care managers who can interfere in the running of homes and the allocation of resources is considered an abuse of their monopoly,' she said.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments