‘The Supreme Court has issued a last-minute order to prevent the eviction of a disabled social housing tenant.’
Local Government Lawyer, 6th August 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Aster Communities Ltd (formerly Flourish homes Ltd) v Akerman-Livingstone [2014] EWCA Civ 1081 (30 July 2014) is an extraordinary decision that will – if allowed to stand – have a significant impact on the day-to-day management of possession claims in the county court.’
NearlyLegal, 5th August 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘In possession proceedings the court should approach a defence based on disability discrimination under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 in the same way as it would approach one based on article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998.’
WLR Daily, 30th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘At the end of May, the High Court ruled that the reduction in Housing Benefit under Regulation B13 of Housing Benefit (Amendment) Regulations – commonly dubbed “the bedroom tax” – did not unlawfully discriminate against a family with a disabled child requiring an additional bedroom for overnight careers because the shortfall was covered by discretionary housing payments.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 4th July 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘There has been an odd bedroom tax development, one on which details are tantalisingly still absent. Mr & Mrs Carmichael have won their appeal to the First Tier Tribunal, apparently on the basis of Mrs Carmichael’s disability, so on grounds of Article 14 read with Art 1 Protocol 1. The Tribunal apparently found that it would be unjustifiable discrimination to impose the bedroom tax.’
NearlyLegal, 24th April 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘In R (on the application of MA & Ors) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Respondent) and The Equality and Human Rights Commission (Intervener) [2014] EWCA 13 the Court of Appeal has rejected appeals against the dismissal of claims for a judicial review of the so-called “bedroom tax”, bringing to an end – for the time being at least – months of speculation about the lawfulness of arguably the most controversial aspect of the Government’s welfare reform programme.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 12th March 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘It is Prison Service policy that prisons provide a fair and equal service to all prisoners, including to those who are disabled. The purpose of this policy is to make sure that the Prison Service meets its obligations under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA). However, for many disabled prisoners, these obligations are not being met.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 4th April 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘Local authorities no longer run many of our publicly funded schools in England but still have plenty to occupy them in the education field. They have a role in the setting up of new academies. They still run their maintained community schools. In Wales, they remain the Welsh government’s preferred providers of state education. They have intervention powers and can suspend a school’s delegated budget.’
11 KBW, 24th February 2014
Source: www.11kbw.com
‘Judge rejects accusations that the so-called ”bedroom tax” unlawfully discriminates against the disabled.’
Daily Telegraph, 21st February 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Obrey v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWCA Civ 1584 concerns an appeal against an Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) decision which set aside the findings of the First-tier Tribunal (Social Security and Child Support) that Reg. 7(17), Housing Benefit Regulations 2006, breached Art. 14 ECHR (although not expressly set out in the Judgment, presumably in conjunction with A1P1).’
NearlyLegal, 6th January 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The case of Crofts Vets and others v Butcher 2013 UKEAT/0430/12/LA and UKEAT/0562/12/LA is perhaps an unusual but important illustration of how far the duty to make reasonable adjustments under disability discrimination legislation goes (now Section 20 of the Equality Act 2010).’
No. 5 Chambers, 4th December 2013
Source: www.no5.com
‘Employers “cannot simply rubber stamp” an occupational health adviser’s opinion that an employee is not disabled, the Court of Appeal has ruled in a case involving a local authority.’
Local Government Lawyer, 11th December 2013
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The Department of Work & Pensions has published a circular to local authorities confirming that new regulations implementing the Court of Appeal’s ruling in the Gorry case will come into force next week.’
Local Government Lawyer, 27th November 2013
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
“At a time when Theresa May has declared that a future Conservative Government would repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 (‘the Act’) and the Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling, is leading a review of the UK’s relationship with the European Court on Human Rights, it is heartening that the judiciary is prepared to apply the Act in a manner which, surely, will attract widespread public support.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 8th November 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“The case of Mr John Scarborough v Canterbury Christ Church University (Scarborough) which was recently decided carries potentially significant implications in terms of bringing a case that may fall under separate heads of action.This article discusses this decision and its practical effect on future litigation.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 7th November 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“When facing a reasonable adjustments claim one of the first lines of defence for an employer is knowledge. An employer can avail itself of the defence of lack of knowledge of the disability (s.20 of Sch 8 of the Equality Act 2010) if it did not know, and could not reasonably have been expected to know, that the person had a disability. The defence is an impenetrable shield and often forms a key battleground at trial.”
13 KBW Employment, 18th November 2013
Zulhayir v JJ Food Service Ltd: [2013] EWCA Civ 1226; [2013] WLR (D) 396
“For an appeal to succeed on the ground of perversity an overwhelming case had to be made out that the court or tribunal below had reached a decision which no reasonable tribunal, on a proper appreciation of the evidence and the law, would have reached.”
WLR Daily, 16th October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Finnigan v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [2013] EWCA Civ 1191; [2013] WLR (D) 378
“When the issue arose of whether a public authority had discriminated against a disabled person in carrying out its functions, contrary to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 or the Equality Act 2010, by having in place a ‘practice, policy or procedure’ (under the 1995 Act) or a ‘provision, criterion or practice’ (under the 2010 Act) to which it had not made reasonable adjustments, the court should first identify what that practice, policy or procedure was as a question of fact, and then determine whether reasonable adjustments had been made to that policy to alleviate the detrimental effects to which a disabled person might be subjected by it. The duty to make reasonable adjustments could not be discharged on an ad hoc basis in relation to individuals but was anticipatory and owed to persons with particular kinds of disabilities as a class.”
WLR Daily, 8th October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“People with mental illnesses are three times more likely to be victims of crime than the general population, new research suggests.”
BBC News, 7th October 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The High Court has rejected claims for a judicial review of the so-called ‘bedroom tax’. Its judgment brings to an end – for the time being at least – months of speculation about the lawfulness of arguably the most controversial aspect of the Government’s welfare reform programme.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 31st July 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024