This Agreement is made on [date] Between 1 [ ] of [ ] (the ‘Administering Authority’); 2 [ ] of [ ] (the ‘Scheme Employer’); 3 [ ] of [ ] (the ‘Admission Body’); and 4 [ ] of [ ] (the ‘Guarantor’). Background (A) The Administering Authority is an administering authority within the meaning of the Regulations. It administers and maintains the Scheme in accordance with the Regulations and has the delegated function of making determinations under section 25(5) of the Public Service Pensions Act 2013 in relation to employees of admission bodies. (B) The Scheme Employer is a Scheme employer within the meaning of the Regulations. (C) The Admission Body is an admission body within the meaning of [ ] of Schedule 2 to the 2013 Regulations and intends to enter into the Admission Agreement. [It is a provider of the [services] [assets] referred to in the Contract and, in performing the Contract, will employ Eligible Employees.] (D) The Guarantor has permission under Part IV of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 to accept deposits or to effect and carry out contracts of general insurance and has agreed to enter into this Agreement as a bond in a

The Local Government Pensions Committee, a committee of councillors constituted by the Local Government Association (LGA), the Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA) and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA).

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. The Local Government Act 1974 (LGA 1974) established a Commissioner for Local Administration more commonly known as the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman or LGO and referred to as the LGO throughout this Practice Note. This Practice Note covers the statutory functions of the LGO, its jurisdiction including matters that it cannot investigate, powers and procedures. It should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: Maladministration—complaints and Maladministration—investigations and reports. LGO’s mission statement is ‘Remedy injustice—help improve local services.’ The LGO’s strategic objectives are to: • ensure the service is easy to find and easy to use • remedy injustice through impartial, rigorous and proportionate investigations • use what is learned from complaints to help improve local services • be accountable to the public and use our resources efficiently The LGO is obliged to prepare an annual report on the discharge of its functions in relation to local authorities and present it to those authorities and Parliament. Each local

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights includes case reports on Sutcliffe v SSE on a prohibiting order on teaching issues concerning a teacher’s Christian faith and his use of pronouns for students; A Local Authority v P in which the local authority’s application to withdraw protective orders in respect of a vulnerable adult was allowed; Re W and others on implementing a care plan for adoption before expiry of the 21-day period for filing notice of appeal and, finally, dismissal of an application for judicial review of the government’s decision to limit sale and supply of puberty blockers in Transactual CIC v SSHC. The weekly highlights also includes further updates on Education, Social care, Children’s social care, Social housing, Healthcare, Governance, Public procurement and Local government finance.

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights includes case reports on the decision in Braceurself Ltd v NHS England ruling that the effect of a breach in procurement is not determinative of seriousness of the breach to attract an award of damages; dismissal of judicial review of disqualification from joining the social housing register due to anti-social behaviour in Willott v Eastbourne Borough Council; Welwyn Hatfield BC v Wang in which it was held that failure to give sufficient reasons in notice to impose financial penalty is not always fatal to imposition of the penalty; SK v Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead in which the Court granted judicial review of the local housing authority’s failure to meet its obligations to produce a personalised housing plan and provide secure accommodation; the Court’s decision to rule recommendations made by the defendant in the Criminal Legal Aid Independent Review irrational and breach of their Wednesbury and Tameside duties in Law Society of England and Wales v Lord Chancellor; the Upper Tribunals conclusion that failure to give sufficient reasons in notice to impose financial penalty is not always fatal to imposition of penalty for breaches of Housing Act 2004 in HMO management in Welwyn Hatfield BC v Wang and Laing v Cornwall Council on challenging conditions of the local planning authority’s decision to grant permission to construct nine dwellings on a site. The weekly highlights also includes further updates on Public procurement, Judicial Review, Governance, Social housing, Education, Healthcare, Planning, Licensing and Social care.

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights includes coverage of the latest Procurement Policy Notes updates plus expert analysis of the Supreme Court decision in R (Spitalfields Historic Building Trust) v London Borough of Tower Hamlets in which the Supreme Court ruled that a provision in a LA constitution limiting the right to vote on an application to planning committee members who had attended all previous meetings which had considered the application was lawful and did not restrict a councillor’s democratic right to vote; Blackburn With Darwen BC v BM and others in which the High Court confirmed that parents can consent to their child’s deprivation of liberty; R (YVR) v Birmingham CC in which the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal challenging an LA decision to maintain its adult social care charging policy requiring the maximum amount permitted by regulations and clarifies who must discharge the PSED within LA decision making structures; Julie Richardson Ltd v Oxfordshire CC in which the claimant nursing homes brought a claim against the LA for unpaid nursing home fees based on unjust enrichment; R (Dr Rosalind Bradbury) v Brecon Beacons National Park Authority, which considered appropriate assessments and the planning committee’s failure to consider relevant information; and The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield v Snell and others, in which the council established a compelling need for an injunction against Persons Unknown to prevent trespass and nuisance. It also includes case reports of Re E (Section 37 Direction) in which the Court of Appeal interpreted the scope of sections 37(1) and 38(1) of the ChA 1989 to be limited to children who are the subject of the proceedings; R (A) v North Central London ICB in which the Court of Appeal addressed an NHS body's breach of duty for failure to arrange an updated healthcare plan for a severely disabled child; R (Royal Borough of Kensington) v NHS NW London ICB in which the court dismissed a judicial review application against an NHS funding decision for a child’s placement in a specialist children’s home; R (TJ) v SLC, in which the court ordered SLC to provide the tablet it had refused following claimant application for disabled student’s allowance; Thiam v Richmond Housing Partnership, in which the court considered whether the decision to seek possession was proportionate to achieving a legitimate aim given the tenant’s disability which contributed to the breach; and R (BMA) v GMC In which the court held that GMC’s decision to promulgate a single set of professional standards guidance was lawful and acted to further patient safety. It also includes further updates on Public procurement, Children’s social care, Social care, Planning, Governance, Education, Social housing, Healthcare and Local authority prosecutions.

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights includes the latest updates on local government reorganisation (LGR), including MHCLG's revised draft plan-making guidance confirming that the pause and review of LGR is not a reason to delay local plans and a statement from the Local Government Pension Scheme Advisory Board requesting implementation plans be paused. Judicial review updates include a new Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide expanding AI and duty of candour guidance and clarifying permission-stage procedure, and a new Practice Statement on urgent consideration applications applicable from 19 October 2026. It also includes case analysis of R (Hewitson) v Parole Board, in which the High Court quashed decisions refusing an oral hearing, and expert analysis of the duties introduced by Martyn's Law. Further updates cover Social housing, Education, Adult social care, Planning and Environmental law and climate change.

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights includes coverage of the Supreme Court decision in Glasgow CC v X which considered whether LHA’s must meet all household needs when providing interim accommodation under section 29 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 plus expert analysis of the decision in R (LW) v Islington LBC, in which the court ruled that delays in the FTT did not justify a judicial review claim regarding an EHC Plan. Case reports include R (Leger) v SSE, where the court upheld the Secretary of State's decision on a teacher's professional conduct; R (YVR) v Birmingham CC, in which the Court of Appeal upheld the LA's adult social care charging policy; and Braithwaite v Lewisham LBC, in which the court found no duty of care or maintenance was breached in a personal injury claim regarding a road narrowing. This weekly highlights also includes further updates on Public procurement, Social housing, Education, Social care, Highways, Children's social care, Local government finance, Planning and Pensions.

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights includes: case analysis of Re E (Section 37 Direction) on the scope of the court's powers under section 37(1) of the Children Act 1989 to direct an LA to carry out an investigation into a child’s circumstances and the consequential power to make interim public law orders under section 38(1)(b). Case reports include R (AA) v Waltham Forest LBC, in which the court ruled on an application for judicial review of a HNAPHP prepared by the LA for alleged failures to fulfill duties under section 189A of the Housing Act 1996; Triathlon Homes LLP v Stratford Village Development Partnership (SSHCLG intervening), in which the court dismissed an appeal finding it just and equitable to make RCOs which can be made in respect of costs incurred before Building Safety Act 2022 came into force; Rose (Mill Road Bridge 2) v Cambridgeshire CC, in which the court considered a judicial review application concerning the validity of a council-ordered traffic regulation; and R (John Morley) v Surrey Heath BC, in which the court ruled on recovery of council tax arrears by the LA but the summons was found to be unlawful and relief refused as it demanded costs for obtaining a liability order and alternatives to judicial review were available. It also includes coverage of the government’s ten-year health plan, the 2025 Keeping children safe in education statutory guidance, Uber’s fights to overturn taxi contract ruling at the UK Supreme Court and the Coronavirus (COVID-19) inquiry Module 1 implementation update. It also includes further updates on Children’s social care, Healthcare, Education, Licensing, Social housing, Highways, Local government finance, Governance, Social care and Planning.

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights includes coverage of the launch of the National Procurement Policy Statement survey, to inform the revision of the statement needed prior to the commencement of the Procurement Act 2023. It also includes a case report on the decision in RR v London Borough of Enfield, in which the court dismissed the disability challenge to Enfield's housing allocation scheme. This weekly highlights also includes further updates on Public procurement, Social housing, Social care, Children's social care, Healthcare, Education and Governance.

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights leads with a major local government reorganisation (LGR) development, with MHCLG pausing the LGR programme, withdrawing the decisions for Essex, Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock; Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Portsmouth and Southampton; Norfolk; and Suffolk, and announcing a rapid review of the process after receiving legal advice. It comes amid further LGR challenge activity, with Hertfordshire CC and South Kesteven DC taking pre-action steps over separate LGR decisions. Public procurement updates include case analysis of Cornwall Council v SSHCLG, on ERDF clawback arising from an unlawful direct award and discriminatory procurement requirement and CMA publishing two papers examining competition in UK public procurement. Further case analysis includes Blackburn with Darwen BC v AD, on the court's scrutiny of deprivation of liberty arrangements for a child where no clear therapeutic pathway had been identified; Enfield LBC v Edwards, clarifying ordinary residence and EHC plan responsibility under the Children and Families Act 2014; and Hylton v Medway Council, confirming that section 19(3) of the Care Act 2014 permits urgent support pending re-assessment. Case reports include DOL v Southampton City Council, in which the High Court found that the council acted unlawfully by delaying implementation of EHC plan amendments ordered by the tribunal. Further updates include Children's social care, Education, Social housing and Local authority prosecutions.

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights includes expert analysis on the decision in Swindon BC v Abrook on the meaning of ‘anti-social behaviour’ when granting anti-social behaviour injunctions. Case reports include AK v Westminster City Council in which judicial review of the Council’s refusal of an application for reciprocal transfer was granted; the dismissal of judicial review of the local authority’s failure to act in compliance with the Equality Act 2010 in relation to accommodation for a person with severe mental health conditions in FG v Royal Borough of Kensington Chelsea; Ms Ulyana Kukhtyak v Hounslow London Borough Council concerning the Council’s failure to include the family on a housing application and refer case to the Exceptional Needs Referral Panel; and the dismissal of a challenge of the planning inspector’s decision to refuse permission for construction of solar park in Low Carbon Solar Park 6 Ltd v SSLUHC. This weekly highlights also includes further updates on Public procurement, Governance, Social housing, Education, Social care, Planning, Licensing and Local government finance.