Area(s) of Law :
Source : EW
RC(S) Ltd appellants (A) landlords of W (R) – R lived in block of flats on third floor, with no lift – R elderly- needed stair lift for easy access to her flat- A refused consent to install stair lift on basis other tenants had voted against, aesthetics, cost of repair, inconvenience as a whole and the Disability Rights code did not require it- County Court held (as a preliminary issue) that the refusal of consent amounted to discrimination against R on the basis of her disability under s.24(1)(a) Disability Discrimination Act 1995- A appealed:-
Held: Appeal allowed. The Judge had fallen into error. He should have carried out a two stage test. He should firstly have identified the relevant act or omission on R’s part, and secondly, he should have looked towards relevant comparators to see if they would have been treated differently. None of the reasons for A’s refusal of consent related to R’s disability and that was sufficient in itself to dispose of R’s claim. The underlying complaint was that A had refused to put R into a better position that that to which she was entitled by her underlease. Managers of premises were under no positive obligation to make adjustments to the common parts of buildings to make them more suitable for disabled people.
This content is provided free of charge for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. No responsibility for the accuracy and/or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted by any member of Chambers or by Chambers as a whole.
Please note that we do not give legal advice on individual cases which may relate to this content other than by way of formal instruction of a member of Hardwicke. However if you have any other queries about this content please contact: