Grantham Hospital: Lawyers call A&E closure 'unlawful'

Grantham's A&E department was downgraded in June 2020

A hospital trust acted unlawfully by failing to consult over plans to shut an A&E department, it has been claimed.

Campaigners say United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust's (ULHT) decision to downgrade Grantham A&E in June was taken without public involvement.

At a judicial review hearing it was argued the failure to consult was a breach of legislation.

ULHT deny breaking the law and say that swift action was needed due to the coronavirus pandemic.

• More news from across Lincolnshire

Plans to replace the A&E department in Grantham with an urgent care centre were first revealed on 8 June and were approved three days later.

The trust said the change, which came in to force on 22 June, would mean Grantham could become a Covid-free site allowing it to restart elective surgery and cancer treatments.

It said the alteration to services would run until at least 31 March.

On Thursday, Vikram Sachdeva QC, said the trust, however, had breached legislation demanding service users are involved in the decision making process.

He also claimed that while the trust had not released the plans until 8 June the plan for Grantham was "the only show in town" by at least 26 May and the proposal could have been shared with the public at that stage.

He also argued that despite the impact of the pandemic the trust still had a "mandatory duty" to uphold.

For ULHT, Fenella Morris QC, said as well as the requirement to involve the public the trust was also bound by law to act "effectively, efficiently and economically".

She argued that in a situation requiring "instantaneous" action, such as a pandemic, a rigid application of the legislation would "render all of those decisions unlawful".

She also told the court that while "broad parameters" of the plan were in place by June the precise detail was not and the trust did not want to present an "inchoate proposal" for fear of raising public anxiety.

Mr Justice Linden, who heard the case, said he would rule on the matter at a later date.