Community Care | UK Bar

11KBW is a top-tier set housing a strong bench of highly sought-after community care specialist barristers. The team is regularly instructed in complex disputes involving procurement issues, cuts to community care services and the rights to access those services, age assessments and data protection matters. The set's barristers are also experienced in the handling of cases related to the impact of Article 8 on community care and frequently appear before the ECtHR. Recently, members continued to be instructed in a major crowd-funded challenge to the government’s initial response to the COVID-19 crisis. The set's barristers also acted for the Worcestershire County Council in R v SS for Health and Social Care, a Supreme Court challenge concerning which local authority has responsibility to fund aftercare services pursuant to Section 117 Mental Health Act 1983.

Instructing solicitors describe 39 Essex Chambers as a go-to set for community care matters, and praise the depth and breadth of expertise available at the chambers. Barristers from the set are regularly called on to represent a diverse client base, including the Official Solicitor as well as several local authorities, health authorities and individuals, in a wide range of cases. Areas of expertise for the team include Children Act challenges, matters concerning asylum seekers, age assessments and care home funding disputes. The set is frequently instructed in the most high-profile cases in the area, and its barristers have considerable experience of appearing before the Supreme Court. Interviewees say: "They are at the top of the list, they are strong in community care." Members featured in the Ncube litigation relating to the lawfulness of actions by the local authority under the 'Everyone In' policy.

Doughty Street Chambers is a market-leading set for community care matters and houses a strong bench of experienced barristers at both senior and junior levels. The set's community care practice is bolstered by its expertise in complementary areas such as social housing and human rights law, and the barristers are highly regarded for their handling of matters involving both children's services and adult social care. The team is noted for its expert representation of vulnerable individuals, and is regularly instructed in disputes involving asylum seekers and trafficked individuals, homeless children and disabled people. This expertise is reflected in R (CB) v Secretary of State for Home Department, a challenge to the government's refusal to increase the rates of asylum support whilst applications are being processed. Instructing solicitors note the barristers are "at the top of their game."

Matrix Chambers is recognised as a leading set for community care and human rights matters. It houses a strong bench of barristers at both senior and junior levels who are experienced in the handling of complex cases at the intersection of community care, immigration, education and prison law, and are regularly involved in the leading cases in the field. Members act for a diverse client base including local authorities, care providers, charities and central government, as well as individual claimants. Recently, Matrix was involved in HA v Secretary of State for Home Department, a challenge concerning the standards for asylum seekers in hotel accommodation. Barristers at Matrix also acted in Binder v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions where the claimants sought judicial review of the National Disability Strategy.

Cornerstone Barristers is noted for its expert handling of a wide range of social care and health matters, and offers representation to healthcare providers, local authorities and hospitals, as well as individuals and families. The set's barristers are regularly instructed in highly sensitive judicial review challenges relating to the care of both adults and children, and age assessment disputes concerning young asylum seekers. The team is also frequently called on to advise local authorities on strategic matters involving budgets. Members recently acted for Derby City Council against the Good Law Project in a matter concerning whether the local authority's duty had been sufficiently met or not. Market sources note barristers at Cornerstone have "excellent knowledge and skill."

The barristers at Garden Court Chambers are experienced in a wide range of community care matters, drawing on the set's recognised strengths in complementary areas such as public law, human rights, immigration and social housing. Members are highly adept at handling cases involving the closure of care homes and hospitals, needs assessments and the funding of community services. Disputes between social services authorities are also a key area of focus for the set. The barristers often appear before the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, as well as the ECtHR. Acting for claimants in judicial reviews has been a particularly fruitful area of work for Garden Court this year. A recent example is OF v Surrey County Council. Tenants have also been engaged in high-profile challenges against the government and public bodies. Instructing solicitors note: "The barristers at Garden Court Chambers are approachable, have great attention to detail and are able to handle complex cases."

Landmark Chambers offers significant expertise in disputes concerning the care of both adults and children. Members are regularly instructed to act on behalf of vulnerable individuals and families, as well as several local authorities, NHS bodies, NGOs and the Department for Health and Social Care. Areas of expertise for the team include challenges arising from the cutting or reorganising of community services, age disputes involving asylum seekers and care planning for individuals in custody. The set's tenants are also frequently called on to advise government bodies on social care funding issues. Ordinary residence disputes form an additional area of strength. Recently, members have been involved in Worcestershire County Council v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, a case concerning the meaning of ordinary residence in Section 117 of the Mental Health Act 1983.

Monckton Chambers is highly regarded for its representation of charities, public authorities, private companies and individual claimants in a wide range of social care cases. Monckton barristers are sought after for their expertise in judicial review challenges arising from cuts to community services and potentially discriminatory policies, and have experience appearing before the higher courts such as the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. Recently, members were involved in DA and RA v United Kingdom (European Court of Human Rights), a case concerning discrimination related to welfare benefits.