0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

judges can now decide who is a child, rules Supreme Court

2 December 2009

In a landmark decision last week, the Supreme Court ruled that where the assessment of the age of an individual is disputed, this issue should now be decided by a court.

In the joint hearing of R(A) v LB Croydon and R(M) v LB Lambeth [2009] UKSC 8, two young immigrants, A and M, sought accommodation under Section 20(1) of the Children Act 1989. However, they were refused this as the relevant local authorities assessed them to be at least 18, and so adults. A and M argued that in cases of disputed age, the court must decide whether a person is a child, with the burden of proof being the balance of probabilities. The respondent local authorities disagreed, and argued for a continuation of the current position, where age assessments were a matter for the local authority alone to decide, with judicial scrutiny of the local authoritys decision limited to judicial review.

The Supreme Court agreed with the applicants. In the leading judgment, Lady Hale ruled that the assessment of age is not an exercise of discretion by a local authority. It is a finding of fact. If the local authoritys determination of the age is contested, then as with other factual disputes, a court should decide the issue.

Local authorities have to make age assessments with increasing frequency, given the growing number of migrants and young asylum seekers who claim to be under 18, but have no formal identification.

There seem to be several procedural options for applying for an age assessment by the court. It should be possible to bring a specific issue application under Section 8 of the Children Act 1989, as well as a free-standing application under Part 8 Civil Procedure Rules, and also an application to the Administrative Court.

Guidance for the conduct of age assessments was given in 2003 in R(B) v London Borough of Merton [2003] EWHC 1689 (Admin). A Merton-compliant age assessment should contain all the evidence a local authority would want to rely upon at the hearing, and so a court application by an individual challenging the assessment should not force the local authority to rush around gathering new evidence.

However additional resource will be needed to cover the hearing of these applications. The Merton guidelines require an age assessment to be signed by two individuals, and both should be ready to give oral evidence at the hearing. This in turn flags up for local authorities a need to give their age assessors witness training.

training and events

6Feb

Planning club Nottingham office

Our regular planning club will be covering planning enforcement POCA and enforcement notices, town and village greens after the Lancashire case, and a planning case law update.

View event

11Feb

Child Abuse Claims – Design your own Redress Schemes and Codes of Conduct seminar Birmingham office

We are delighted to invite you to attend our next social care forum in Birmingham.

View event

focus on...

Legal updates

Social care - January 2020

Welcome to our social care newsletter for January 2020, focusing on fostering, child abuse claims and the impact of these cases.

View

Legal updates

Understanding the risk - looked after children trends and the impact on claims

Last month the government published the latest annual update on the numbers of looked after children.

View

Legal updates

Potential liability for child sexual and criminal exploitation

The Children Act 1989 imposes a statutory duty on Local Authorities for Looked After and certain other young people as they prepare for adulthood.

View

Legal updates

What we have learned about costs claims in child abuse cases

The Courts are slowly accepting that these cases are very much now in the mainstream of litigation, they still do have their quirks which many judges consider separate them from the pool of general personal injury litigation.

View

The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up