GE (Eritrea
) at [38]-[40]. This is a case under (2). 34. An “eligible child” is a child who: (1) is aged 16 or 17; and (2) has been looked after by a local authority for the prescribed period (i.e. 13 weeks in aggregate) which began after reaching the prescribed aged (14) and ended after reaching 16: para.19B(2) of Schedule 2 to the 1989 Act, and reg. 40(1) of the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (England) Regulations 2010 (above). 35.Where s. 23C applies, then the FRC is entitled to support under the leaving care provisions (ss. 23C and 24D) until the age of 21 (or later if s. 23C(7) or s. 23 CZB apply). The transitional planning for a care leaver begins before the individual’s 18th birthday and the detailed requirements are set out in the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review Regulations 2010 (above) and the Care Leavers (England) Regulations 2010 (S.I. 2010/2571). The Regulations are supplemented by statutory guidance in The Children Act 1989 guidance and regulations, Volume 3: planning transition to adulthood for care leavers (rev. Jan 2015). The duties have been recently reinforced by the introduction of the requirements for corporate parenting in s. 1 of the Children and Social Work Act 2017 (in force from 1.4.18) and the new s. 23CZB of the 1989 Act which widens the application of local authority duties.36. The importance of the duties is highlighted in the Preface to the guidance: “These regulations and guidance are designed to ensure care leavers are given the same level of care and support that their peers would expect from a reasonable parent and that they are provided with the opportunities and chances needed to help them move successfully in to adulthood. Research and practice show that those leaving care supported according to the following principles have the best chance of a successful transition to adulthood: • quality; • giving chances where needed; • tailoring to individuals’ needs. This guidance seeks to have these principles at the centre of decision making for care leavers.”37. See e.g. Dobbs J. on the importance of pathway planning in
- Hearing date: 1 May 2018
- Introduction
- Secretary of State for the Home Department
- Duty of candour
- R (Quark Fishing Limited) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
- R. (Midcounties Co-operative Ltd) v Forest of Dean DC
- Relevant law
- Provision of accommodation for children: general
- local authority in relation to children looked after by them.
- R. (G) v Southwark LBC
- R (A) v Croydon LBC
- R (G) v Barnet LBC
- R (O) v London Borough of Lambeth
- Continuing functions in respect of former relevant children
- R (D) v Southwark LBC
- GE (Eritrea
- R(Birara) v Hounslow LBC
- R (M) v Hammersmith & Fulham LBC
- Facts
- ACCOMMODATION and HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE HOME
- McDonald v RBKC
- The grounds of challenge
- Ground 2
- G v Southwark
- R. (Collins) v Knowsley MBC
- D v. Southwark
- Southwark
- GE (Eritrea)
- Ground 3
- Simplex GE (Holdings) Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment
- R (BC) v Birmingham CC
