Barber v LB Croydon (2010) EWCA Civ 51: Difference between revisions
(Created page with '''(1) The council's decision to seek an immediate order for possession, following an assault which was almost certainly linked with the claimant's learning difficulties and a pe…') |
m (Text replacement - "{{stub}} " to "") |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
[http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/51.html Bailii] | [http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/51.html Bailii] | ||
[[Category:Disability discrimination]] | [[Category:Disability discrimination]] | ||
Revision as of 21:08, 26 May 2015
(1) The council's decision to seek an immediate order for possession, following an assault which was almost certainly linked with the claimant's learning difficulties and a personality disorder, without applying the Council's policy on vulnerable people, was Wednesbury unreasonable. (2) The DDA aspect of the appeal was unsuccessful: the question was not whether he was treated less favourably than a person without his disabilities but whether he should have been treated differently precisely because he has such disabilities and because they were a significant contributory factor to his behaviour that day.
External link
The following categories (in blue boxes) can be clicked to view a list of other pages in the same category: