Disability and the test for reasonablness
After reading about the case of the young boy in the south of the country who wants proper changing room facilities at a funpark "where he spends the whole day"and seeing comments arguing both sides. I've carried out a bit of research and based on previous knowledge on the legislation and case law, I am writting this post to try and clarify the matter somewhat.
The arguments placed here is based on the provisions of the Equality Act and consumer protection case law which may be relevant and may help explain the maters.
It is clear that the Equality Act 2010 places a duty on any person not to discriminate against a person ( discrimination is defined by ensuring people are treated according to their own personal needs and are not treated less favourably then another person in a similar situation). The Act states that where this happens in relation to disability a person must take reasonable steps to change the criteria practise or process. It extends this to changes to physical features and premises. In this case thus the argument is it reasonable for the company to have to make these changes.
The whole argument revolves around in my view on the term of reasonablness. The first thing we need to look at is whos view of reasonablness is taken in to consideration. It is not the judge or a disability expert. The test comes from case law and refers to a man on the Clapham omnibus. This is to say is a reasonably educated, intelligent but nondescript person, against whom the defendant's conduct can be measured. Once we have such a person to make the decision we must look at what is reasonable for the company to do. Bearing in mind the size of the company and its assets the type of company how many they employ and profit all have relevance. The small corner shop with a small number of staff and a small profit margin has to do less than the large multi national company. This is based on case law( Boots v Garett) and relates to testing a reasonable amount of goods to ensure safety of a product
In this case it is reported that in the article and stated by the company that a changing room facility that is required would cost £40,000 My own investigations lead me to believe that 10 To £12,000 is a better estimate. However this may just be the equipment and the company may be arguing on the basis that they have to build a seperate facility. This fact is unclear. However what is clear is that the comapny who own the fun park are registered as a company and their accounts are available for everyone to see on line at the company house portal on gov.uk ( note the name of the park is not the name of the company).
Once you have this information I am sure you can make up your own minds wether it is reasonable for a company who has that many assets and makes that much profit and wether it is reasonable for them to provide additional facility that will not only make it easier for the boy to spend the day at the park but for others too.
At the end of the day the judge who has to listen to the case will have to weigh the facts of the case. Each case hinges on individual facts and no one knows what they truly are untill it gets to court. However based on my investigations and the facts I have at this time I feel I know which side has the strongest argument at the moment
The arguments placed here is based on the provisions of the Equality Act and consumer protection case law which may be relevant and may help explain the maters.
It is clear that the Equality Act 2010 places a duty on any person not to discriminate against a person ( discrimination is defined by ensuring people are treated according to their own personal needs and are not treated less favourably then another person in a similar situation). The Act states that where this happens in relation to disability a person must take reasonable steps to change the criteria practise or process. It extends this to changes to physical features and premises. In this case thus the argument is it reasonable for the company to have to make these changes.
The whole argument revolves around in my view on the term of reasonablness. The first thing we need to look at is whos view of reasonablness is taken in to consideration. It is not the judge or a disability expert. The test comes from case law and refers to a man on the Clapham omnibus. This is to say is a reasonably educated, intelligent but nondescript person, against whom the defendant's conduct can be measured. Once we have such a person to make the decision we must look at what is reasonable for the company to do. Bearing in mind the size of the company and its assets the type of company how many they employ and profit all have relevance. The small corner shop with a small number of staff and a small profit margin has to do less than the large multi national company. This is based on case law( Boots v Garett) and relates to testing a reasonable amount of goods to ensure safety of a product
In this case it is reported that in the article and stated by the company that a changing room facility that is required would cost £40,000 My own investigations lead me to believe that 10 To £12,000 is a better estimate. However this may just be the equipment and the company may be arguing on the basis that they have to build a seperate facility. This fact is unclear. However what is clear is that the comapny who own the fun park are registered as a company and their accounts are available for everyone to see on line at the company house portal on gov.uk ( note the name of the park is not the name of the company).
Once you have this information I am sure you can make up your own minds wether it is reasonable for a company who has that many assets and makes that much profit and wether it is reasonable for them to provide additional facility that will not only make it easier for the boy to spend the day at the park but for others too.
At the end of the day the judge who has to listen to the case will have to weigh the facts of the case. Each case hinges on individual facts and no one knows what they truly are untill it gets to court. However based on my investigations and the facts I have at this time I feel I know which side has the strongest argument at the moment
- Get link
- Other Apps
Comments
Post a Comment