Key Facts
- •Claimant's child was sexually abused by a neighbor.
- •Neighbor still lives next to Claimant.
- •Claimant's child is living abroad due to the trauma.
- •Claimant applied to Westminster City Council for a reciprocal transfer of housing.
- •Westminster refused the transfer citing high demand.
- •Claimant alleges indirect discrimination against women under the Equality Act 2010 and breaches of the Public Sector Equality Duty, Article 14 ECHR read with Article 8 ECHR, and s11 Children Act 2004.
Legal Principles
Indirect discrimination under s19 and s29 of the Equality Act 2010.
Equality Act 2010
Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) under s149 of the Equality Act 2010.
Equality Act 2010
Article 14 ECHR in conjunction with Article 8 ECHR.
European Convention on Human Rights
Duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children under s11 Children Act 2004.
Children Act 2004
Unlawful fettering of discretion in policy implementation.
R v London Borough of Jones ex parte James [1995] ELR 55
Outcomes
Relevant sections of Westminster's Housing Allocation Scheme declared unlawful due to indirect discrimination and failure to comply with PSED.
The policy's reciprocal transfer provisions disproportionately disadvantage women fleeing violence by effectively imposing a residency requirement, and Westminster failed to demonstrate justification for this discrimination or comply with its PSED.
Westminster ordered to reconsider Claimant's application by treating her as a Westminster tenant under section 5.1 of the Policy.
The Decision was not made lawfully; the Council failed to adhere to its own policy and breached s11 Children Act 2004.