Supreme Court: Human Rights trumps Bedroom Tax rules
The Supreme Court has ruled where there was a ‘transparent medical need for an additional bedroom’, which was not catered for in regulation B13 (5) and (6), there was unjustified discrimination on the ground of disability, contrary to article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The case centred around RR, who lives in a two bed property with his severely disabled wife. He was subject to the bedroom tax, despite needing a second bedroom because of his wife’s disabilities and the need to accommodate equipment that she needed. The court ruled that subordinate legislation should be disregarded if it is in conflict with the Human Rights Act.
A summary of the judgement can be found here.