Mani, R (on the application of) v Lambeth & Anor

Section 21(1)(a) of the National Assistance Act 1948 is not confined to applicants whose disability creates a care need that itself calls for residential accommodation. Under the Ex parte O approach, a need made materially more acute by illness, disability or another circumstance beyond lack of funds and accommodation is not a need arising solely from destitution. That approach applies equally to destitute asylum seekers. The statutory schemes are mutually exclusive: where the section 21 duty applies, support under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 is unavailable. Earlier NASS provision does not transfer or extinguish the local authority’s liability.

Mr Mani was a destitute Algerian asylum seeker with a congenital leg abnormality and mental-health vulnerability. NASS had provided accommodation on earlier occasions, and Lambeth later provided accommodation pending determination of liability. Wilson J held that Lambeth owed the duty under section 21 of the National Assistance Act 1948: [2002] EWHC Admin 735. Lambeth appealed, arguing that section 21 applied only where the disability created an accommodation-related care need. It alternatively argued that NASS was responsible during any interval before section 21 entitlement arose, or that its previous provision relieved Lambeth of liability.

Appeal dismissed. Lord Justice Simon Brown delivered the judgment. Lord Justice Judge and Mr Justice Nelson agreed.

1. The primary argument failed. Section 21(1)(a) of the National Assistance Act 1948 is not limited to persons whose disability creates a need for care and attention that itself calls for residential accommodation. Section 21(1A) does not narrow subsection (1)(a) in that way. The earlier authorities, including R v Westminster City Council ex parte M (1997) 1 CCLR 85, R v Wandsworth LBC ex parte O; R v Leicester CC ex parte Bhikha [2000] 1 WLR 2539 and the Court of Appeal decision in Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service 4 CCLR 143, compelled that conclusion.
2. The applicable test was whether the need for care and attention was made more acute to any material extent by a circumstance other than the mere lack of accommodation and funds, including age, illness or disability. That test applied equally to asylum seekers and other persons subject to immigration control. The House of Lords had expressly left its correctness open in R (Westminster City Council) v National Asylum Support Service [2002] 1 WLR 2956; the Court of Appeal remained bound by it.
3. The statutory schemes were mutually exclusive. Where the section 21 duty applied, the asylum seeker could not obtain support under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. The existence of the local-authority duty prevented reliance on NASS support and did not create overlapping responsibility.
4. The proposed intervening period between destitution and reaching a qualifying state under section 21 did not create a separate section 95 entitlement. Regulations 6(3)(a) and 23 of the Asylum Support Regulations 2000 required the local authority to ignore asylum support provided, or which might be provided, when assessing destitution.
5. NASS’s earlier accommodation and readiness to continue providing it did not transfer or extinguish Lambeth’s liability. Neither functus officio nor public law estoppel could produce that result. If Lambeth was liable, NASS had no power to continue providing accommodation. The appeal was dismissed with costs to be assessed on the standard basis if not agreed. Detailed assessment of the respondent’s publicly funded costs was ordered, and leave to appeal to the House of Lords was refused.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): The appeal from Wilson J’s decision was dismissed with costs. Leave to appeal to the House of Lords was refused: [2003] EWCA Civ 836.
• High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Administrative Court: Wilson J held that Lambeth owed responsibility for Mr Mani’s accommodation under section 21 of the National Assistance Act 1948: [2002] EWHC Admin 735.