What does Rose v Thanet tell us about the status of NICE guidelines in priority setting?

6 DECEMBER 2014

| 1 min read

We look at this judgment and its consequences for commissioners in the health service.

In Rose v NHS Thanet Clinical Commissioning Group (2014) the Administrative Court considered whether the CCG had acted unlawfully in failing to implement a clinical guideline issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, despite there being no statutory duty to do so.

Our content explained

Every piece of content we create is correct on the date it’s published but please don’t rely on it as legal advice. If you’d like to speak to us about your own legal requirements, please contact one of our expert lawyers.

Contact

Jane Williams

Senior Associate
Jane Williams

Senior Associate
- +(44)(0)121 456 8421
- Contact Jane
  
  Contact Jane Williams
  
  * = required
  
  First name *
  
  Last name *
  
  Organisation
  
  Email address *
  
  Phone number
  
  Your message *
  
  Send enquiry
  
  Mills & Reeve will use the information you provide in this form in accordance with our privacy policy. We may from time to time send you general updates by email or post that we think you will find of interest. This includes notification of upcoming event and updates or alerts containing relevant legal news. You can update your preferences at any time and will be able to easily unsubscribe from anything that you do not wish to receive.
  
  check
  
  Thank you
  
  Thank you for your enquiry. We will be in touch shortly.
  
  Close
  
  Reset form
  
  Close overlay
- Birmingham

What does Rose v Thanet tell us about the status of NICE guidelines in priority setting?

Our content explained

Further reading

General practice: five business essential guides

Reflections on techUK’s five-point plan for CareTech

Jane Williams

Contact Jane Williams

Visitors

Existing clients

Staff