| Display title | David Lock, 'Looked after children and secure accommodation after 9 September' (Local Government Lawyer, 3/9/21) |
| Default sort key | David Lock, 'Looked after children and secure accommodation after 9 September' (Local Government Lawyer, 3/9/21) |
| Page length (in bytes) | 1,427 |
| Page ID | 13411 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Edit | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Move | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Page creator | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 21:30, 4 September 2021 |
| Latest editor | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 22:10, 19 March 2023 |
| Total number of edits | 5 |
| Total number of distinct authors | 1 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | This article discusses the implications of the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2021. It notes: "The effect of the 2021 Regulations is that from 9 September 2021 a placement by a local authority in an unregulated setting is not lawful for any looked after child who is under 16 years of age. That almost certainly applies to existing placements as well as new placements. ... On 30/7/21 the Supreme Court ruled in Re T (A Child) [2021] UKSC 35M that the inherent jurisdiction could be used to declare that such placements, however undesirable, were lawful if they were the only practical option available to local authorities. However, it is hard to see how a placement can be declared lawful under article 5 if it is unlawful under UK domestic law." It later transpired that the inherent jurisdiction can authorise deprivation of liberty despite the placement being unlawful: see Tameside MBC v AM (2021) EWHC 2472 (Fam). |