the Times on a case, Williams v Richmond Court (Swansea) Ltd (heard on 14 December 2006), on disability discrimination. The landlord was appealing against the Judge's finding against him at first instance that he discriminated against 81 year old tenant Mrs Williams who had requested he install a stair lift, as she found it difficult to use the stairs.
The Court of Appeal found that the landlords did not discriminate, as the reason they had refused to install the stair lift was not because Mrs Williams was disabled. The reasons given by them for refusing consent included, (i) that the other tenants had voted against the proposal; (ii) aesthetics; (iii) the cost of repair; (iv) inconvenience to the residents as a whole; and (v) the Disability Rights Commission code of practice made it clear that it was not under any duty to make reasonable adjustments to the premises.
The Court of Appeal said that Judges have to carry out a two-stage exercise. First, it was necessary to identify the relevant act or omission on the part of the appellant, and second, it was necessary to look to comparators to see if they were or would have been treated differently.
Here, none of the reasons given by the landlord for refusing consent related to Mrs Williams’ disability. The underlying complaint was that the they had failed to put her in a better position than that to which she was entitled by her underlease, namely by failing to take positive action and providing consent to the installation of the stair-lift.
Landlords will no doubt feel fairly pleased at this judgment. I am sorry I am unable to provide a BAILLI link but the case does not appear to have been reported there yet.
There is an interesting report in
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Cool Followers
Popular entries
-
The Securities and Exchange Commission has voted unanimously to introduce amendments designed to strengthen the regulatory framework govern...
-
Figures from the DCA show that landlord possession claims were 20% down during the last quarter. Co-incidentally this was the first quarter...
-
The Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta released a very interesting order today, considering whether the right to freedom of exp...
-
Earlier this year, in Hawkes v Cuddy [2009] EWCA Civ 261 , the Court of Appeal declined to follow the position, adopted in Re Guidezone [2...
-
Note - the Landlord Law Blog has now moved to www.landlordlawblog.co.uk . There is still quite a bit of confusion regarding the recent deci...
-
Like many people I suspect, I was concerned to read the recent BBC report about glass ceilings which, the report said, means that "to...
-
In Gregson v HAE Trustees Ltd & Ors [2008] EWHC 1006 (Ch) a so-called "dog-leg" claim was brought against the directors of a ...
-
Public limited companies in Norway were given until the start of this year to implement rules designed to increase the representation of wom...
-
Today, April 6, is an important date for aficionados of the Companies Act 2006 and anyone else interested in the Government's programme...
-
The Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner is investigating after old medical records were found in a dumpster behind a coffee shop by...
Comments
Post a comment on: Landlord success in disability discrimination case