“A leading light on the Northern circuit…”
Legal 500 2015
Adam Fullwood’s main areas of practice are public and administrative law (community care / adult social services, care homes, charging, safeguarding, housing, Inquests, prison, care standards, education, human rights law, mental capacity and mental health, Court of Protection and immigration), regulatory and disciplinary, public procurement and local government. He has particular experience in representing care home owners and care providers.
He is a member of the Attorney General’s regional panel. He is also a member of the Treasury Solicitor’s Freedom of Information panel and the Equality and Human Rights Commission panel of Counsel.
Adam acts for central government departments and agencies, local authorities, educational bodies, the Official Solicitor, regulators, health authorities and care trusts, private care providers, charities and NGOs, as well as patients, service users and private litigants. He has particular interest / experience in community care, mental capacity, education, health, human rights & civil liberties, inquests, inquiries, local government, prison law and social housing.
Adam accepts instructions across a wide range of disciplines for both practitioners and regulators.
Consistently recommended by Chambers & Partners and Legal 500.
Chambers UK 2015
“He is very good – he’s always well prepared, and is a good negotiator and advocate.”
“He is very reliable, and is able to provide solicitors with the confidence that the client will be well looked after.”
“He’s very down to earth and an effective advocate.” “He’s very reliable in respect of deadlines and getting things to you.”
Legal 500 2015
“A leading light on the Northern circuit when it comes to mental capacity work”
Chambers UK 2014
Adam is recommended in Chambers and Partners in 4 of his main practice areas.
Administrative & Public Law
“Handles public law matters in cases intersecting with social housing law, human rights and Court of Protection matters.”
“He is impressive in court and very friendly towards clients.” “He is fair, straight-talking and very knowledgeable. He will fight hard but he will do so in a very proper fashion. His oral and written advocacy is very good.”
Court of Protection (Health & Welfare)
“His practice encompasses community care matters and mental capacity issues. “He sees the wider picture and gives a solid overview.” “An excellent all-rounder who has a good knowledge of local authority procedures,” he has worked on some high-profile cases.”
Civil Liberties & Human Rights
“Specialises in human rights matters involving mental health, mental capacity, social care and social housing. He also handles cases concerning deaths in custody. “He has excellent all-round legal and client skills. He has exceptional advocacy skills and is a thoroughly reliable and reassuring presence both in and out of court.””
“Handles social housing matters as part of a broader administrative and public law practice. He frequently acts for local authorities and has particular expertise in cases involving questions of mental capacity. “A very good housing lawyer. Very ‘to the point’ and very popular with solicitors.” “Good on his feet and on paper.””
Significant reported cases:
Rochdale Council v KW & ors  EWCOP 45 – Mostyn J held that there was no deprivation of liberty for the purposes of ECHR art.5 where a person who was severely physically and mentally disabled was being looked after in her own home under arrangements which were made and paid for by a local authority. If the person did not have the physical or mental ability to exercise the freedom to leave, she could not realistically be constrained from exercising it. Permission to appeal to Court of Appeal granted.
An NHS Trust v Mrs J (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor)  EWCOP 2675 (medical treatment decision in favour of Trust).
Liverpool City Council v SG  EWCOP 10 (DoL of children in a children’s home in light of OFSTED/CoP Guidance, Feb 2014)
IM v (1) LM (2) (3) Liverpool CC  EWCA Civ 37 (leading case on the test for capacity to engage in sexual relations)
Trafford v Blackpool Borough Council  EWHC 85 (Admin) (judicial review of decision not to grant new lease of commercial premises)
RC v (1) CC (2) X Local Authority  EWHC 131 The President of the Court of Protection gives guidance in relation to disclosure in the Court of Protection. When considering whether to disclose documents within proceedings the question is whether disclosure should be withheld because it is “strictly necessary” not the other way around.
TA v AA & Knowsley Council (2013) EWCA Civ1661 (The words “an appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from any decision of the court” in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 s.53(1) did not include a decision made by a judge nominated unders.46(2)(a) to (c) granting or refusing permission to appeal a decision of a judge at first instance under the Court of Protection Rules 2007 r.172(7).)
R (Greenough) v Ministry of Justice  EWHC 3112 Challenge to decision not to grant exceptional funding for sister of deceased at an Inquest where concerns raised that the local authority did not implement a package of domiciliary care in the period following discharge from hospital and leading to his death at home
R (Bhatti) v Bury MBC  EWHC 3093 Where judicial review proceedings had been stayed by consent it would be wrong to allow them to be reinstated and amended to challenge a subsequent decision where that challenge did not involve even an incidental consideration of the decision originally challenged.
R (Mary George Limited) v Care Quality Commission & anr  EWHC 1341 (challenge to recommendations made by CQC re quality of care at private care home)
Szpak v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions  EWCA Civ 46 (challenge to vires of worker registration scheme for A8 nationals)
R (AZ) v Hampshire County Council  UKUT 87 (IAC) (challenge to age assessment of unaccompanied asylum seeker child)
R (AJ) v Calderdale Borough Council  EWHC 3552 (challenge to procurement decision concerning provision of domiciliary care services)
R (Omar)v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWHC 2081 (challenge to fresh claim decision by Secretary of State)
R (Weska)v Parole Board  EWHC 827 (challenge to decision of parole board re-categorisation)
Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council v Norton  EWCA Civ 834 (collateral challenge to claim for possession under Equality Act duties)
The Queen on the application of DM v Wigan BC  EWHC 2175 (challenge to provision of services to autistic child)
R(Whittaker) v Sec of State for Home Department  EWHC 2166 (challenge tore-categorisation of Cat A prisoner)
London Borough of Hounslow v Powell  UKSC 8 (Art 8 defence to possession claim against introductory tenant)
Sheffield City Council v Wall  EWCA Civ 922 (succession to secure tenancy)
Mullen v Salford City Council  EWCA Civ 336 (Art 8 defence to possession claim against homeless accommodation)
Moran v Manchester City Council  UKHL 39 (use of women’s refuges to discharge statutory homelessness duties)
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v ZA  UKUT 294 (challenge to compatibility of A8 worker registration scheme with EC Treaty)
Knowsley Housing Trust v Prescott  EWHC 924
Liverpool CC v Hillingdon LBC  EWCA Civ 43 (inter-authority dispute in context of asylum support)
R(Farrell) v Cheshire CC  EWHC 260 (Admin) (lawfulness of LA’s scheme for granting “Blue Badges” for bus drivers in context of CRB disclosure)
R(Gilboy) v Liverpool CC  EWCA Civ 751 (compliance with Article 6 of LA’s demoted tenancy scheme)
White v Knowsley BC  UKHL 70 (possession orders in assured tenancy regime)
Riverside Housing Association v White  UKHL 20 (validity of rent increases by housing association)
Griffiths v St Helens MBC  EWCA Civ 160 (Homelessness – important guidance on s193discharge)
Crown Prosecution Service v T  EWHC 728 (Admin)
LB of Lambeth v O’Kane; Helena Housing v Pinder  EWCA Civ 1010 (circumstances in which a new tenancy is created following the breach of a suspended possession order by a “tolerated trespasser”)
Manchester CC v Lee; G v Wigan MBC  1 WLR 349 (width of mandatory injunction obtained by local authority)
Taylor v Inland Revenue  EWCA Civ 174
Manchester City Council v Lee  ewca
R(Cumpsty) v The Rent Service  EWHC 2526 (Whether scheme for determining local reference rent compliant with Article 6)