Background
TDB, a vulnerable young adult with autism, ADHD, mental-health difficulties and complex care needs, had long received specialist support. His difficulties included self-harm, absconding, unsafe use of social media, and understanding relationships and sexual boundaries. After Haringey concluded that he was ineligible for its specialist learning-disability service, it completed a Care Act 2014 needs assessment in December 2024.
The assessment recorded information from TDB’s placement provider that he lacked capacity concerning relationships and sexual boundaries, but the assessing social worker did not obtain a Mental Capacity Act 2005 assessment. Nor did Haringey seek input from a psychologist or psychiatrist. TDB challenged the assessment by judicial review. HH Judge Bird dismissed the claim, and TDB appealed.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeal unanimously allowed the appeal. It held that whenever there is reason to doubt the capacity of a person undergoing a Care Act needs assessment, an appropriately qualified professional must conduct a decision-specific capacity assessment under the Mental Capacity Act before the needs assessment is completed. The statutory presumption of capacity does not justify declining to investigate legitimate doubts about capacity.
There was clear reason to doubt TDB’s capacity concerning relationships, contact with others, and internet and social-media use. Without assessing capacity, Haringey could not properly determine his needs or the appropriate support. Given TDB’s complex conditions and needs, the authority also acted irrationally by failing to obtain psychological or psychiatric advice; regulation 5 of the Care and Support (Assessment) Regulations 2014 imposes mandatory requirements concerning assessor competence and necessary expert consultation.
The court quashed the December 2024 Care Act assessment. It declined, however, to direct Haringey to conduct a fresh assessment because TDB’s future care was being considered in ongoing Court of Protection proceedings, where any further assessments should be determined.
Key Takeaways
- A local authority must obtain a Mental Capacity Act assessment before completing a Care Act needs assessment whenever there is reason to doubt the person’s capacity on a relevant, decision-specific matter.
- The presumption of capacity cannot be used to avoid assessing capacity where legitimate doubt exists, and capacity does not depend on whether the person has a formal learning-disability diagnosis.
- Care Act assessors must possess the required skills, knowledge and competence, and authorities must consult relevant specialists when the individual’s needs require expertise the assessor lacks.
Why It Matters
The judgment clarifies the relationship between the Care Act and the Mental Capacity Act. Capacity may affect both the substance of a needs assessment and the person’s effective participation in it, so authorities must address genuine doubts before settling needs and support.
For local authorities and practitioners, the ruling makes clear that capacity assessment and specialist consultation are legal safeguards, not optional additions in complex cases. A failure to use them can render a Care Act assessment unlawful and liable to be quashed.