Advise Henry and Health Action Group as to whether and if so on what basis they can challenge the decision of Boldwood NHS Trust and as to their chances of success.

CONSTITUTIONAL & ADMINISTRATIVE LAW 

ASSESSMENT 3 

Assessment task: Summative related to a legal problem

Weighting: 50%

Method of Submission: Turnitin

Word count or equivalent: 1,500 words excluding footnotes

All summatives must be submitted electronically via Turnitin. You will find a link to the Turnitin Assignment from the Assessments area of the Blackboard course menu.

When submitting, please enter your student ID number in the “submission title” box. The document itself should contain your student ID number in a header or footer; your name should not be visible on the work.

Turnitin generates an Originality Report, and you are encouraged to make use of this facility as a support tool to help you ensure the source material in your summative is correctly referenced before final submission. You will be able to submit revised drafts of your work up until the summative due date. Only the final version will be marked by your tutors. At the due date and time, no further submissions or changes are possible. Whatever is in the Turnitin inbox at this time will be regarded as your final submission.

Word Limit: A 10% tolerance is permitted – in other words, no marks will be deducted if your word limit is less than 10% above the stated maximum.

Assessment Criteria

The assessment marking criteria are intended to assist you in the preparation of this assessment. You should refer to the criteria and the module learning outcomes regularly when working on this assessment.

Please read the question below first, and then ensure that you adhere to the following marking guidelines when writing your summative.

Your submission must cover 8 separate ‘topics’. Marks will be awarded for each of these topics:

1. Introduction – 10 marks
2. Why JR is appropriate in this case? 10 marks
3. Does Health Action Group and Henry have the right to claim, and if so, why? 15 marks
4. Any policy reasons to refuse JR in this case? 10 marks
5. An explanation of basic JR procedure – 10 marks
6. Grounds for JR in this case – 25 marks
7. JR remedies – what are they? Which one is appropriate here? – 10 marks
8.  What are the chances of success of this claim? 10 marks 

QUESTION:

Assume that the Health Services Act 2017 empowers health authorities and NHS Trusts to offer revolutionary new treatment to elderly people suffering from life threatening illnesses.  The Act further provides that any decision of a local health authority or NHS Trust shall be final.

Henry is sixty-six years old and suffers from lung cancer.  He has been told by his doctors that he is an ideal candidate for a new treatment regime and that this would give him a life expectancy of up to ten years.  He is upset when Boldwood NHS Trust refuses to authorise the treatment.  In a letter explaining the decision, Boldwood NHS Trust says that it has been swamped by similar requests and that, for financial reasons, it is carefully screening applicants. The letter also explains that the decision was reached on the basis that Henry is a prominent supporter of the National Front (a far-right extremist political party in the UK), and that Boldwood NHS Trust did not want to provide treatment to him as it might be seen as providing implicit support for this political organisation.

Henry takes the letter to the Health Action Group, a well-established charity seeking to provide support and guidance for those with serious health problems.  They are very concerned that this decision could have adverse consequences for their members if other local health authorities and NHS trusts adopt the same policy, namely to screen patients based on their political views.

Advise Henry and Health Action Group as to whether and if so on what basis they can challenge the decision of Boldwood NHS Trust and as to their chances of success.

                                        END OF THE ASSESSMENT