CM v Bradford Metropolitan District Council & Anor

CM v Bradford Metropolitan District Council & Anor

The adverse impact of regulation 13D(2) on disabled persons in the appellant's position is not manifestly disproportionate to its legitimate aim and therefore not manifestly without reasonable foundation; the First-tier Tribunal's failure to ask the correct question was not material as the outcome would have been the same.

Parties
Appellant: CM; First Respondent: Bradford Metropolitan District Council; Second Respondent: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (SSWP)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Upper Tribunal Decision
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Housing Benefit, Disability Discrimination, Article 14 ECHR, Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR, Manifestly Without Reasonable Foundation, Discretionary Housing Payments
Social Security Discrimination Human Rights Housing Benefit Disability Discrimination Article 14 ECHR Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR Manifestly Without Reasonable Foundation +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CM

Appellant

Bradford Metropolitan District Council

First Respondent

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (SSWP)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Upper Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether limiting the appellant's housing benefit to the one-bedroom shared accommodation rate unlawfully discriminated against her on grounds of disability contrary to Article 14 ECHR and Article 1 of the First Protocol
  2. 2 Whether the discrimination was objectively and reasonably justified under the 'manifestly without reasonable foundation' test

Ratio Decidendi

The adverse impact of regulation 13D(2) on disabled persons in the appellant's position is not manifestly disproportionate to its legitimate aim and therefore not manifestly without reasonable foundation; the First-tier Tribunal's failure to ask the correct question was not material as the outcome would have been the same.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The decision of the First-tier Tribunal stands.
  • No material error of law found.