View source for R (Liverpool City Council) v SSH (2017) EWHC 986 (Admin)

{{Case
|Date=2017/03/02
|NCN=[2017] EWHC 986 (Admin)
|ICLR=[2017] WLR(D) 314
|ICLR ID=2016097483
|Other citations=[2017] PTSR 1564, [2017] MHLO 15
|Court=High Court (Administrative Court)
|Judges=Garnham
|Parties=Liverpool City Council, Nottinghamshire County Council, London Borough of Richmond upon Thames, Shropshire Council, Secretary of State for Health, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
|Sentence=DOLS funding case
|Summary="By these proceedings, four English councils seek to challenge what they describe as the government's 'ongoing failure to provide full, or even adequate, funding for local authorities in England to implement the deprivation of liberty regime'. They suggest that the financial shortfall suffered by councils across the country generally is somewhere between one third of a billion pounds and two thirds of a billion pounds each year and claim that the Government must meet that shortfall. They seek a declaration that, by his failure to meet those costs, the Secretary of State for Health has created an unacceptable risk of illegality and is in breach of a policy known as the 'New Burdens Doctrine'. They seek a mandatory order requiring the Secretary of State of Health to remove the 'unacceptable risk of illegality' and to comply with that doctrine."
|External links={{link|http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2017/05/03/councils-lose-court-battle-deprivation-liberty-funding/|Andy McNicoll, 'Councils lose court battle for more deprivation of liberty funding' (Community Care, 3/5/17)|s}}
|Subject=Deprivation of liberty
|News=No
|RSS pubdate=2021/2/18 08:46:43 PM
}}