Legal Challenge Looms for Ealing Children's Centre Closures
Letter sent warning of potential judicial review of decision
A demonstration against the closures outside Ealing Council offices
August 13, 2025
Ealing Council is facing a potential judicial review following its decision to close or repurpose ten of the borough’s 25 children’s centres. A formal legal warning was issued on 5 August by solicitors Rook Irwin Sweeney, acting on behalf of a local resident. The letter argues that the council’s consultation process was legally flawed and that the decision may breach statutory duties under the Childcare Act 2006.
The challenge comes after months of public opposition to the closures. A petition organised by the campaign group Save Ealing’s Children’s Centres has attracted nearly 2,500 signatures. The Liberal Democrat opposition has also taken a role in resisting the proposals. Councillors have tabled a formal motion to reverse the decision, proposed a fully funded budget amendment to keep all centres open, and provoked a full debate at a recent meeting of the full council. They have also supported public demonstrations outside Perceval House and worked alongside campaigners to raise awareness.
The council’s Cabinet approved the closures on 11 June, as part of its new Early Help Strategy. The stated aim was to restructure services and improve outreach provision across the borough. Following the consultation, three centres—Jubilee in Ealing, Petts Hill in Northolt, and Dormers Wells in Southall—were removed from the closure list. However, campaigners have criticised the lack of transparency around this decision and continue to oppose the closure of the remaining centres.
The legal letter sets out three grounds for challenge. First, it argues that the consultation was unlawful because the council had already committed to making £751,000 in savings before the consultation began. This, the letter claims, meant that the process was not conducted at a formative stage and presented only one viable option—closure of the majority of centres.
Second, the letter alleges that the council failed to meet its legal duty to ensure sufficient provision of children’s centres under section 5A of the Childcare Act 2006. It claims that the council did not provide any meaningful analysis of how the closures would affect accessibility or demand, nor did it demonstrate that the remaining centres would be adequate to meet local need.
Third, the letter accuses the council of failing to comply with statutory guidance issued under the Sure Start programme. This guidance advises that local authorities should not close children’s centres unless they can show that outcomes for disadvantaged children will not be adversely affected. The solicitors argue that Ealing Council did not provide sufficient evidence or reasoning to justify its departure from this guidance.
The claimant has requested that the council rescind its decision and undertake a fresh consultation that includes alternative options to closure. If the council does not respond by 4pm on 19 August, the claimant intends to proceed with a judicial review and seek costs.
In response, an Ealing Council spokesperson said, “Ealing Council remains committed to improving access to our Early Help and Children’s Centre services for all families in our community. We are aware of the legal challenge that has been brought forward and will be consulting with our legal team.”
Liberal Democrat Councillor Jonathan Oxley, spokesperson for children’s services, criticised the policy, stating that the closures would adversely affect deprived and vulnerable children. He said the decision ignored academic research highlighting the importance of children’s centres in supporting early development and wellbeing. Councillor Oxley added that it was a “sad indictment” of the council’s approach that legal action was now required to ensure residents’ concerns were heard.
Like Reading Articles Like This? Help Us Produce More This site remains committed to providing local community news and public interest journalism. Articles such as the one above are integral to what we do. We aim to feature as much as possible on local societies, charities based in the area, fundraising efforts by residents, community-based initiatives and even helping people find missing pets. We've always done that and won't be changing, in fact we'd like to do more. However, the readership that these stories generates is often below that needed to cover the cost of producing them. Our financial resources are limited and the local media environment is intensely competitive so there is a constraint on what we can do. We are therefore asking our readers to consider offering financial support to these efforts. Any money given will help support community and public interest news and the expansion of our coverage in this area. A suggested monthly payment is £8 but we would be grateful for any amount for instance if you think this site offers the equivalent value of a subscription to a daily printed newspaper you may wish to consider £20 per month. If neither of these amounts is suitable for you then contact info@neighbournet.com and we can set up an alternative. All payments are made through a secure web site. One-off donations are also appreciated. Choose The Amount You Wish To Contribute. If you do support us in this way we'd be interested to hear what kind of articles you would like to see more of on the site – send your suggestions to the editor. For businesses we offer the chance to be a corporate sponsor of community content on the site. For £30 plus VAT per month you will be the designated sponsor of at least one article a month with your logo appearing if supplied. If there is a specific community group or initiative you'd like to support we can make sure your sponsorship is featured on related content for a one off payment of £50 plus VAT. All payments are made through a secure web site. |