Tappin v The Government of the United States of America

Tappin v The Government of the United States of America

The Council complied with its duties under Section 49A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The budget decision was preliminary and did not commit the Council to specific policies until after detailed equality impact assessments and consultations were completed. The Council considered the impact on disabled persons and implemented mitigation measures. The process was not a mere formality, and the Council kept an open mind as to the policies to be implemented. The challenge is therefore dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: JG; Claimant: MB; Defendant: Lancashire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Public Sector Equality Duty, Budgetary Decisions, Adult Social Care, Disability Discrimination Act Compliance, Consultation Requirements
Administrative Law Disability Law Local Government Law Public Sector Equality Duty Budgetary Decisions Adult Social Care Disability Discrimination Act Compliance Consultation Requirements

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JG

Claimant

MB

Claimant

Lancashire County Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Lancashire County Council complied with its duty under Section 49A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 when approving budget and policy changes affecting adult social care services.
  2. 2 Whether the Council's equality impact assessments and consultations were adequate to demonstrate due regard to the needs of disabled persons.

Ratio Decidendi

The Council complied with its duties under Section 49A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The budget decision was preliminary and did not commit the Council to specific policies until after detailed equality impact assessments and consultations were completed. The Council considered the impact on disabled persons and implemented mitigation measures. The process was not a mere formality, and the Council kept an open mind as to the policies to be implemented. The challenge is therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • The application for judicial review is dismissed.
  • The judge indicated an intention to disallow the Claimants’ costs for late evidence and to require them to pay the Council’s costs for responding to that evidence.