A And B (Minors: placement, faith)

Hilton Harrop-Griffiths (instructed by City Solicitor, Manchester ) for the Defendant

This judgment was handed down remotely by circulation to the parties' representatives by email.� It will also be released for publication on BAILII.� The date and time for hand-down is deemed to be 2 p.m. on Monday 1 March 2021.

In short, the claimants challenge the decision by the defendant as the relevant local authority to offer respite placement accommodation for the boys in a residential home in the Greater Manchester area, known as Birtenshaw, instead of in an exclusively orthodox Jewish residential home in the London area, known as Bayis Sheli. �The claimants contend that if placed in Birtenshaw the boys will be unable to manifest their strict orthodox Jewish faith, whether by complying with kosher dietary laws or by fully observing the Sabbath and other holy days.�

The claim raises the issue as to whether or not the decision is public law unreasonable, in the context of the statutory background of Part III of the Children Act 1989 ( CA 1989 ) against which the decision was made, and the further issues as to whether or not the decision is contrary to Articles 8, 9 and/or 14 of the European Convention for Human Rights ( ECHR ) and/or relevant provisions of the Equality Act 2010 ( Eq A 2010 ).� ���

It is clear that the claimants face a high hurdle to persuade me that the defendant�s decision is one which is not reasonably open to a local authority, acting responsibly in accordance with the statutory scheme under the CA 1989, and it is also clear that the arguments under the ECHR and Eq A 2010 raise fact sensitive issues where there is room for legitimate disagreement.�