LHG, R (on the application of) v Bury Council

At an interim stage, the court may grant mandatory relief where the available evidence provisionally supports the claimant’s case and the balance of justice requires immediate protection pending an expedited substantive hearing.

The court should avoid making final findings of fact or determining the merits. It must assess the evidence cautiously, recognise its secondary and supervisory role, and consider interim relief together with the timetable for resolving the claim. Relief may be tailored to the practical circumstances and limited period before the substantive hearing.

This was a further paper determination in judicial review proceedings concerning the claimant’s care and support needs and the provision of Direct Payments by Bury Council. It followed the court’s earlier judgment, [2023] EWHC 3162 (Admin), and was made under paragraph 7 of the previous order.

The court considered further documentary evidence concerning the availability and cost of support sessions, accumulated arrears, and the claimant’s needs during school holidays. The central issue was the appropriate interim arrangement pending an expedited substantive hearing in March 2024.

1. The court directed an expedited substantive hearing and replaced the earlier interim provision. The Council was required to provide an additional 10 hours of Direct Payments per week, producing 14 hours outside school holidays and 18 hours during school holidays.

2. No final findings of fact were made. The evidence was assessed provisionally for interim purposes, and the court emphasised that it was not the primary decision-maker and that caution was required.

3. The evidence provisionally supported the conclusion that the relevant support sessions were available to the family only at £30 per session, rather than £15. The Council’s evidence did not sufficiently explain or support its contrary position. The family’s mounting debts and the apparent importance of the sessions were material circumstances.

4. Interim relief and expedition were considered together. The expedited hearing reduced the injustice that could arise if interim relief were granted or refused before the substantive merits were determined. Covering the sessions at the £30 rate, without ordering interim back-payment, was the course required by the balance of justice.

5. For the school holidays, the court declined to order funding for a residential camp in London. It nevertheless considered the greater caring challenges, the absence of school support, the claimant’s father’s availability, and existing Direct Payments. For the short period until the substantive hearing, the additional 10 hours, together with the existing 8 hours, was sufficient to meet the balance of justice.

6. The substantive issues remained for determination at the March 2024 hearing.

This was a further interim determination in the same judicial review proceedings. It was not stated to be an appeal.