Is [2015] 2 All ER 942 still good law?

This case has been given negative treatment in 1 later judgment(s) in this dataset (e.g. doubted or not followed), so its authority may be qualified — verify before relying on it.

How many times has [2015] 2 All ER 942 been cited?

[2015] 2 All ER 942 is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2015] 2 All ER 942

· cited by 2 · influence score 14/100

Is it still good law? ⚠️ This case has negative treatment (1 citation(s): e.g. doubted / not followed / overruled). Check carefully before relying on it.

How to cite

[2015] 2 All ER 942

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Treatment

Doubted · 1Considered · 1

Citation network

Cited by (2)

Considered — Lisa Paley v The London Borough of Waltham Forest 2022-02-04
“…The Supreme Court considered the duties placed upon local authorities in out of borough placements in Nzolameso v Westminster[2015] UKSC 22; [2015] 2 All ER 942. Baroness Hale, having traced through the development of the duties of local authorities in relation to out of borough placements, said:…”
Doubted — Adesotu v Lewisham London Borough Council 2019-08-02
“…he view that the doubts expressed obiter in Panayiotou were “not easy to reconcile” with dicta of Lady Hale in Nzolameso v City of Westminster [2015] UK SC 22; [2015] 2 All ER 942. Having considered these authorities and the more recent decision of this court in Alibkhiet v Brent LBC [2018] EWCA Civ 2742, he said at [97]:-…”

Frequently cited alongside

Alibkhiet v London Borough of Brent v City of Westminster [2018] EWCA Civ 2742 2×
[2002] EWHC 280 (Admin) 1×
[2003] 1 AC 430 1×
[2021] EWCA Civ 897 1×
[2003] UKHL 5 1×
[2015] UKSC 22 1×