SPOTLIGHT
Shelved 400px

What now for deprivations of liberty?

What will the effect of the postponement of the Liberty Protections Safeguards be on local authorities? Local Government Lawyer asked 50 adult social care lawyers for their views on the potential consequences.
SPOTLIGHT

A zero sum game?

The number of SEND tribunal cases is rising and the proportion of appeals ‘lost’ by local authorities is at a record high. Lottie Winson talks to education lawyers to understand the reasons why, and sets out the results of Local Government Lawyer’s exclusive survey.

Charity launches judicial review challenge over policy for distributing medical research funding

A charity has launched a legal challenge over United Kingdom Research and Innovation’s  (UKRI’s) policy on distributing medical research funding.

UKRI is a non-departmental public body funded by £6bn of grant-in-aid from the UK government. It brings together seven Research Councils, Innovate UK and Research England.

The claimant, Miricyl, claims that current funding based on the number of academics or other factors would result in mental health researchers losing up to £1.5bn of funding over the next ten years.

The charity wrote a letter before action to UKRI on 29 April 2019 setting out why it believes that the current policy is unlawful.

According to Miricyl, in its response UKRI agreed to carry out an equality impact assessment, for only one of their nine divisions, and not until the end of the year. However, it also reportedly stated in its response that they did not accept the policy was potentially discriminatory.

Miricyl said it believed that any assessment on that basis would be ineffective, and so announced last week that it would be launching legal proceedings.

The claimant will argue that:

  • The policies used by UKRI to distribute funding indirectly discriminate against those with mental health issues. “They argue that the ‘allocation method’ to distribute funds, which matches funds from charitable donations, disadvantages research into mental health, because mental health research receives only 3% of charitable funding whilst the human and financial impact of mental health on society is 16% of all illnesses.”
  • The policy for allocating funding cannot be justified, “because it neglects mental health research despite the NHS spending more on mental health than any other health condition”.
  • UKRI failed to discharge its Public Sector Equality Duty when creating and implementing the allocation method policy.

Miricyl is fundraising for the case through CrowdJustice.

Rowan Smith, solicitor from law firm Leigh Day, said: “Mental health issues affect a huge number of people across the UK and our client believes it is only fair that UKRI creates a new policy that puts mental health research on a fair footing compared to physical health research.

“It is clear from UKRI’s response that it has never turned its mind to the potential discrimination before now. Our client hopes this legal action helps to shine a light on these issues, particularly during Mental Health Awareness week.”