[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales Care Standards Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Care Standards Tribunal >> Chandra v Commission for Social Care [2007] EWCST 11057(EA) (28 November 2007) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCST/2007/11057(EA).html Cite as: [2007] EWCST 11057(EA)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

Dr Girish Chandra

Appellant

-v-

Commission for Social Care

[2007] 1057.EA

Respondent

Decision on an application to Strike Out

- before -

Mr A Wadling

(Nominated Chairman)

Heard on 2 November 2007 at the Care Standards Tribunal, 18 Pocock Street, London SE1 0BW

Representation

The Appellant: Dr Chandra appeared in person

For the Respondent: Mr Stephen Janisch of Solicitor RadcliffesLeBrasseur

The law

1. This is an application to Strike Out an appeal against the decision of the Respondent of 6 June 2007 to refuse to register the Appellant as the manager of a care home is the under Regulation 4A(1)(d) of the Protection of Children and Vulnerable Adults and Care Standards Tribunal Regulations 2002.
2. Regulation 4A of the 2002 Regulations under the heading of Misconceived appeals or applications etc provides that

(1) The President or the nominated chairman may at any time strike out an appeal or application for leave mentioned in regulation 4 on the grounds that-

(a) it is made otherwise than in accordance with the provision in these regulations for-

(i) initiating that appeal; or

(ii) applying for leave;

(b) it is outside the jurisdiction of the Tribunal or is otherwise misconceived;

(c) it is frivolous or vexatious; or

(d) the President or the nominated chairman considers that the appeal or application has no reasonable prospect of success.

Events prior to the hearing

3. Dr Chandra and his wife, also a Doctor, were the registered owners of a Care Home in Portsmouth. A decision was taken in December 2006 by CSCI to cancel their registration. An appeal was lodged and the matter was heard by a tribunal in June 2007. The appeal was unsuccessful and the Appellants registration was cancelled on 25 June 2007, (see the decisions [2006] 825 & 826.EA and [2007] 874 & 875.EA).
4. The findings of the Tribunal recorded in paragraphs 1 to 21 of the Conclusions section of the Decision were very much adverse to the Appellant. The findings included the following;

"We started first by considering the issue of whether or not the Appellants were fit to be proprietors of the care home and we have concluded they are not."

...."certainly since the coming into force of the new regulatory regime there has been little or no evidence of ongoing compliance with the legal and regulatory requirements."

..."the evidence given by both the Appellants lead us to conclude without hesitation that either the Appellants do not understand the statutory and regulatory requirements imposed on them or if they do, they have no ability to implement suitable policies and procedures to discharge their responsibilities."

...."their attempts to find a suitably qualified manager and dealing with the management issue has in our view been unsatisfactory, insufficient and inadequate."

5. On 6 June 2007 CSCI refused an application to register Dr Chandra as manager of the Care Home on the grounds that he was not fit within the meaning of Regulation 9(2) of the Care Homes Regulations 2001. On 4 July 2007 Dr Chandra appealed to the Tribunal against the decision to refuse to register him as a manager.
6. On 10 August 2007 directions were made by the Deputy President, Mr Simon Oliver in respect of this appeal, namely that the Appellant shall make written

representations in response to the Respondent's application to Strike Out by 31 August 2007 setting out the grounds to dismiss the appeal. A response was made by a letter dated 21 September 2007.

The Hearing

7. The Appellant provided a document which gave a brief summary of the history of the care home. In the document he claims that the "Home has been running satisfactorily." Otherwise, the submissions were addressed to matters that were the subject matter of his previous failed appeal hearing. Both in the document and briefly in evidence, the Appellant asserted that he had "enough qualifications and experience to care and manage the home".
8. I also had the benefit of very thorough and helpful written submissions from the Respondent setting out the criteria to be satisfied before the Appellant could be considered for the post of manager of a care home.
9. Regulation 10 of the Care Homes Regulations requires that the registered manager shall, having regard to the size of the care home, the statement of purpose, and the number and needs of the service users, manage the care home with sufficient care, competence and skill.

Conclusions

10. On the evidence available to me in this hearing, I find that this appeal has no reasonable prospect of success. The findings of the Tribunal in [2006] 825 & 826.EA and [2007] 874 & 875.EA) are set out in para 2 above evidence the fact that the Appellant lacks the skills and qualifications necessary to carry on or manage a care home. His written submissions for this hearing which contradict the previous Tribunal's findings do nothing to advance his case.

ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL IS STRUCK OUT

Costs:

The question of whether there is an order for costs is a matter for the discretion of the President or the nominated Chairman. I hereby direct that if the Respondent seeks such an order, he must within fifteen working days of receipt of this Decision issued under regulation 33(1), set out the reasons why he considers that the Appellant has acted unreasonably in bringing or conducting the proceedings, and provide a schedule of costs under Regulation 24(2)(a) incurred by him in respect of the proceedings. I shall then invite the representations from the Appellant in accordance with regulation 24(2)(b). If no application is made by the Respondent within fifteen working days of receipt of this Decision there shall be NO ORDER AS TO COSTS.

Application to set aside

The Appellant may apply in accordance with Regulation 4A(4) to the President for this determination to be set aside. Such an application must be made not later than ten working days after the date upon which the notice of the determination was sent to the Appellant. Any application to set aside this determination must be in writing, setting out the grounds in full (Regulation 4A(5)(b)).

A Wadling

(Nominated Chairman)

Date: 28 November 2007