Edward Taylor

Information about the specialist

edward.taylor@osborneslaw.com

Practice Areas

Edward is an Administrative and Public Law solicitor. He challenges at the High Court, by way of Judicial Review, unlawful, unfair, abusive, and unreasonable acts and omissions of public bodies. He represents clients in cases against central government, in particular confronting decision-making by the Home Office/Secretary of State for the Home Department. He also challenges local authority social services and housing departments in London and across the country, seeking to ensure access to justice for those living in areas without available legal aid representation.

Edward’s areas of specialism:

Asylum Law:

- Age disputes for unaccompanied asylum-seeking putative minors.

-Unlawful detention of asylum-seeking minors/putative minors.

-Unsuitability of Home Office/NASS accommodation.

-Improper transfers to alternative Home Office/NASS accommodation.

-Lack of provision/delay of financial support from the Home Office.

Community Care Law:

-Failure to accommodate minors/putative minors as Looked After Children.

-Challenge to social care assessments, support provision, and meeting needs.

-Refusal to exercise discretion in terms of leaving care support.

-Failure to promote the educational achievement of Looked After Children.

-Acting for those who lack capacity, including working alongside the Official Solicitor and Public Trustee.

Housing Law:

-Refusal to provide interim accommodation following the making of a homelessness application.

-Unsuitability of interim accommodation provided.

-Failure to provide suitable accommodation following a finding of unsuitability or further to the acceptance of a main housing duty.

-Challenge to priority afforded under housing allocation schemes.

Edward not only brings cases on behalf of individuals but also pursues challenges to wider issues in society. In 2017, he acted in a case establishing the unreliability of dental age assessments for unaccompanied asylum-seeking minors; in 2019, he acted in a case which determined that local authorities could not rely on medical opinion from their contracted doctors who had not met the homeless individual over medical opinion obtained from doctors who had done so; and in 2021 he acted in a case concerning the elements of lawfulness and fairness when conducting a ‘short form’ assessment of age.