They said they were "disabled" to leverage the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act, which makes it unlawful for a landlord to discriminate against a disabled person by evicting them for a reason related to their disability, unless justified by the need to protect the health or safety of them or others.
The judge decided that their illnesses were not sufficiently severe to amount to disability under the act. The tenants appealed. On the appeal the council argued that, even if the women were disabled, bringing the possession claims did not infringe the act.
The Court of Appeal upheld the decision that the women were not disabled but also decided that, if they had been, there would have been unlawful discrimination if the misconduct had been related to their disabilities and the council had been unable to establish that it had acted to protect the health and safety of neighbours. The council would have to show that it had considered the health and safety justification when it issued the notice seeking possession.
Source
Housing Today
Reference
This confirms last year's case of North Devon Homes v Brazier. It gives general guidance to social landlords on how to approach possession claims brought for a reason relating to a tenant's disability. It will be important whenever there may be a link between mental illness and a breach of tenancy, for example, failure to pay rent caused by inability to manage finances.
