Facts: Barnsley was entitled to possession of the Norton family’s dwelling and brought possession proceedings. The Norton family defended possession proceedings on the public law ground that the daughter of the family was disabled, but Barnsley had breached its disability equality duty under section 49A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

Judgment: the Court of Appeal (Maurice Kay, Carnwath and Lloyd LJJ) held that Barnsley had been in breach of the disability equality duty, by failing to have due regard to the needs of the disabled daughter before and during the possession proceedings: because the disability equality duty applied to all the local authority’s functions. In all the circumstances, it was right to make a possession order, but Barnsley should have considered the need to secure suitable accommodation for the disabled daughter and her own small baby and were required to do so now.

Comment: as this case shows, whilst the disability equality duty/PSED is often relevant to policy decisions, it can also be relevant to decisions in individual cases although, it seems, the court has expressed satisfaction that ordinary community care procedures do, in themselves, result in substantial compliance with those duties.