R (A) v Croydon LBC

The Supreme Court has held that, in the case of a dispute about whether an individual is a child (and thus a person for whom a local authority is bound to provide accommodation under section 20 of the Children Act 1989), it is for the court itself on a claim for judicial review to determine the age of that individual on the balance of probabilities. It allowed appeals from the decision of the Court of Appeal who had held that it was for the court merely to consider whether the local authority’s decision about the individual’s age was unreasonable. Such disputes are likely to arise in the case of individuals seeking asylum with no documentary proof of age.

The Supreme Court also considered obiter whether an individual’s right to accommodation from a local authority could be a ‘civil right’ for the purpose of article 6 of the ECHR and, if so, whether the concept of ‘full jurisdiction’ requires the court itself to determine any dispute about the existence of that right on the merits given the financial interest which the local authority itself has in the outcome of that dispute. The majority considered that judicial review of the local authority’s view would suffice to secure compliance with article 6 (assuming that it was engaged), having referred to the decision of the ECtHR in Tsfayo v the UK (2006) 48 EHRR 457.

John Howell QC was leading counsel for A .