R (Carmichael) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2016] UKSC 58
判决理由
The removal of the spare room subsidy ('bedroom tax') for disabled persons who required an additional bedroom for care purposes constituted unjustified discrimination under Article 14 ECHR read with Article 8.
事实
Two disabled claimants challenged housing benefit reductions under the 'bedroom tax' policy. Both required an extra bedroom for disability-related reasons.
判决摘要
The Supreme Court held that the failure to exempt persons who required an additional room for disability-related reasons constituted discrimination. A declaration of incompatibility was considered but the court instead read down the regulations.
关键引述
"The discrimination could not be justified given the importance of the home and the particular needs of disabled persons."
— Lord Toulson
后续处理
Led to changes in the spare room subsidy policy for disabled persons.