Facts: Mr de Almeida was terminally ill with AIDS and there was no real support available for him in Portugal; however, Kensington and Chelsea refused to provide him with accommodation and support under section 21 of the National Assistance Act 1948.

Judgment: Lang J held that Kensington and Chelsea had acted unlawfully: it had applied too strict a test, by asking whether Mr de Almeida was incapable of undertaking domestic tasks, when the correct approach was to ask whether he reasonably required support with such matters, which he plainly did, during periods of fluctuating ill health and, in the circumstances (the court not limiting itself to a review on traditional judicial review grounds), it would be incompatible with Articles 3 and 8 ECHR to require Mr de Almeida to spent his last short period of life in Portugal.