Local authority round-up 20 March 2026

Education

AI apprenticeships to close digital skills gap holding back millions of workers

Skills England have launched new AI and automation practitioner apprenticeships to help businesses boost productivity and adopt emerging technology safely and responsibly.

Apprentices will learn to identify where AI and automation can save time, reduce costs and improve performance. They will focus on solving real-world problems that slow down organisations, such as duplication data entry and repetitive manual processes. On top of this, apprentices will be shown how to use AI in a safe and responsible way. This includes protecting sensitive data, avoiding bias and complying with regulatory requirements.

AI adoption can boost the UK economy by up to £400 billion by 2030 through enhancements in innovation and workplace productivity. This new level 4 apprenticeship has been made available to all employers, regardless of what sector they work in. the first batch of apprentices are starting on the 18-month programme this month.

For more information, please click here.

Health & Social Care

Government publishes framework for delivery of neighbourhood health services

The Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) has issued a policy paper on how integrated care boards (ICBs), local authorities, health and wellbeing boards and other partners should create and deliver neighbourhood health services.

The document, along with forthcoming NHS guidance for population health delivery models, sets out the first three of the four changes outlined in the NHS England’s Medium Term Planning Framework:

• Creating the archetypes so local systems have the governance structures to help neighbourhood health succeed.
• Delivering guidance to create both a common description of neighbourhood health and a common set of outcomes and metrics to help define success.
• Developing early financial incentives to support local systems to accelerate change
• Establishing a new approach to joint working across NHS and local government leaders, including more collaborative strategic commissioning that will help to “hard-wire” the establishment of neighbourhood health now and into the future.

These changes will be supported by the development of integrated care boards (ICBs) into strategic commissioners and a new collaborative way of working with local authorities.

For more information, please click here.

Stay up to date with:

• Trending Topics
• Latest Insights
• Upcoming Events
• Company Updates

Follow us on LinkedIn

Take Me There

Judicial Review

Ward Hadaway can report another successful outcome for our Public Law & Public Sector team. We were pleased to represent Kirklees Council in the successful defence of Court of Appeal proceedings in the latest of several judicial reviews in which our team has recently acted.

In a judgement delivered by Lord Justice Zacaroli – with Lady Justice May and Lord Justice Dove agreeing – the Court applied the principles from Mansell v Tonbridge & Malling BC (a leading planning case) to local authority decision making in the context of adult social care. As the Court noted:

“in my view, the principles concerning the interplay between the recommendation set out in the officers’ reports and the decision taken in reliance on them apply equally to the circumstances of this case”.

This outcome highlights Ward Hadaway’s depth of expertise in complex public law litigation and our continued commitment to supporting public sector organisations in legally challenging environment. A summary of the case is set out below, together with a link to the article about it.

Summary

This case concerned a local authority’s decision to sell two specialist dementia care homes. The appellant argued that the council had acted irrationally, both by relying on an outdated cost figure for independent provision and by failing to consider making savings that would allow it to continue running the homes itself. Permission for judicial review had been refused, and the appellant appealed.

Key facts

• The council consulted on transferring the homes to an independent provider.
• Its reports compared the cost of running the homes with the cost of funding private providers, using a per‑unit weekly figure of £69, which was two years old.
• On that basis, the council projected savings of £680,000 per year per home.
• The judge at the permission stage held the figure was outdated, but applying Senior Courts Act 1981 s.31(2A) and s.31(3C), decided it was highly likely the decision would have been the same using an updated figure (£943.93), which still indicated substantial savings (approx. £524,000).

Grounds of appeal

1. Irrational failure to explore internal cost‑saving options.
2. Error in finding that using the outdated figure would not have affected the outcome.
3. (By respondent’s notice) The council said the judge was wrong to call the reliance on the outdated figure irrational in the first place.

Held – Appeal dismissed

1. No irrationality for failing to explore alternatives

• The Tameside principle gives decision‑makers discretion over what inquiries to make.
• The judge had already rejected the argument that the council breached its Tameside duty by not examining internal savings, and the appellant could not reframe it as irrationality.
• The council had long operated the homes under financial strain, and no credible cost‑saving alternative had been identified.

2. Reliance on the outdated figure was not irrational or misleading

• Applying Mansell, the court assessed whether the reports misdirected the Cabinet.
• The Cabinet had been explicitly told the financial data was based on outdated values.
• Officers reasonably avoided updating the figures in each report to prevent confusion.
• The Cabinet was aware costs were rising annually; the precise figure did not materially affect the strategic judgment.
• The scale of projected savings – over £500,000 per home per year, plus avoidance of future capital costs – remained substantial even with updated figures.
• Therefore, the outdated figure did not materially mislead the Cabinet or render the decision unlawful.

Result

The judge had been entitled both to:

• conclude the council acted rationally, and
• refuse permission applying the “highly likely” test.

As a result, the appeal was dismissed.

For more information, please click here.

Upcoming events

Procurement and public law update

Date: 24 March 2026

Time: 9.am – 11.30 am

Location: Ward Hadaway, 5 Wellington Place, Leeds, LS1 4AP

Our in-person Procurement and Public Law Update covers the new procurement rules and their increased transparency requirements.

This seminar will look at what those changes have meant in practice since both the new Act and the new NHS regime came into force. We will give practical tips on how to manage procurements now and how to deal with the risks of challenge when the timescales are so tight.

Register here to join this free session with procurement law experts Tim Care and Matthew Brady.

The Exchange

We invite you to join us for the third session in The Exchange series, in collaboration with NRG. This will focus on one of the most pressing priorities facing organisations today: People and Culture.

In a climate shaped by economic pressure, global instability and rising social expectation, culture is no longer a supporting theme. It sits at the heart of organisational resilience, reputation and commercial performance.

We will be exploring:

• Why culture matters more than ever in the context of geopolitical uncertainty, economic challenge and workforce complexity
• The emerging and future trends shaping the next People and Culture agenda
• How to drive meaningful cultural change from the boardroom and evidence its commercial return

Register here to join us at our Newcastle office on 20 May from 9am-11.30am.