Facts: Three local residents in receipt of community care services sought a judicial review of Harrow’s decision, taken for budgetary reasons, to change its eligibility criteria from substantial and critical, to critical only.

Judgment: Deputy High Court Judge Mackie QC held that Harrow’s decision-making was unlawful because the decision-makers had not been referred to the disability equality duty (a forerunner of the PSED) at section 49A of the DDA 1995: it was not sufficient to mention a ‘potential conflict with the DDA’; decision-makers had to be informed what their duties under the disability equality duty were. If that had been done, there would have been a written record of it.