Gráinne Mellon and Isaac Ricca-Richardson of the Garden Court Community Care Team acted for the Appellant. They were led in the Court of Appeal by Victoria Butler-Cole KC (39 Essex Chambers) and instructed by Monica Kreel of TV Edwards.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal against dismissal of an application for judicial review of a local authority’s assessment of social care needs under the Care Act 2014.
Background
The Appellant, TDB, has a range of complex needs including autism, speech and language disorder, ADHD, and personality disorder. TDB requires extensive specialised support, with the local authority responsible for meeting his needs. Despite that, he had long been without appropriate support, and his condition and behaviour had deteriorated significantly as a result.
In October 2024, TDB’s solicitor wrote to the local authority challenging the decision to withdraw support from the Haringey Learning Disability Partnership (HLDP) and urging the local authority to undertake a fresh assessment of TDB’s needs under the Care Act 2014, with appropriate specialist expertise in place, and a review of his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan.
In March 2025, judicial review proceedings were issued on TDB’s behalf, challenging the legality of a December 2024 Care Act assessment.
Court of Appeal Judgment
The grounds of appeal put forward on TDB’s behalf were:
- (1) Ground 1: Errors in relation to approach to capacity. The judge erred in law by finding that an assessment of the appellant’s mental capacity was not required prior to the completion of his needs assessment pursuant to the Care Act.
- (2) Ground 2: The judge erred in law by finding that specialist input requested on T’s behalf was not required. The 2014 Regulations and associated statutory guidance required such input in the circumstances of T’s case.
- (3) Grounds 3 and 4: Unlawful lack of reasons and/or factual basis to support conclusions about grounds for re-referral to HLDP and T’s ability to cope without HLDP support.
Mind, intervening, emphasised that the issues “concern systemic features of Care Act assessment practice affecting people with mental health problems, autism and learning disabilities, including the legal and practical consequences of treating mental capacity as a matter arising only where concerns are identified, as opposed to an integral component of lawful assessment….”
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and quashed the Care Act assessment of 13 December 2024.
The Court of Appeal concluded that an assessment of capacity was required in this case before completion of the Care Act assessment in December 2024 and the judge was wrong to conclude that it was not.
More generally, the Court of Appeal held that, where there is reason to doubt a person’s capacity in relation to matters relevant to their care and support needs, an assessment under the Mental Capacity Act must be carried out before the Care Act assessment is completed.
That is because understanding a person’s capacity is often fundamental to understanding their needs, their wellbeing and the support required to keep them safe and enable them to participate fully in decisions about their lives.
The Court further found that the Care Act (Care and Support (Assessment) Regulations 2014) imposes a mandatory obligation to ensure that the assessment is carried out by someone with the necessary skills, knowledge and competence and, where required, the local authority must consult a person who has the necessary expertise required.
Given TDB’s complex diagnosis and needs, the Court of Appeal found that the local authority ought to have sought the advice of a psychiatrist or psychologist.
Decisions about TDB’s future care are now being determined in the proceedings in the Court of Protection.
See full judgment: TDB, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Haringey [2026] EWCA Civ 1184 (15 September 2026)
