A three-stage test provides some answers in disabled access cases
Series: Architects' Journal ; 221(5) 10 February 2005, 46(1)Publication details: 2005Subject(s): Summary: Reports on the case of "Roads v Central Trains Ltd" ([2004] EWCA Civ 1541, unreported) which has provided some guidance from the courts on the duty of service providers to take reasonable measures to provide disabled access to buildings under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA). R had difficulty changing at Thetford station on a journey to Norwich as a footbridge that connects the two platforms was impossible for him to use. The original trial judge had found it was not reasonable for Central Trains to provide a taxi but the CA disagreed. In reaching their conclusion, a three stage test was conceived, with the last question being the most difficult to answer in this instance: is the provision that has been made reasonable? It was ruled that the policy behind the DDA is not a minimalist policy of providing the disabled with some access: it is to provide access as close as is reasonably possible to the public at large.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS68783 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 128940-1001 |
Reports on the case of "Roads v Central Trains Ltd" ([2004] EWCA Civ 1541, unreported) which has provided some guidance from the courts on the duty of service providers to take reasonable measures to provide disabled access to buildings under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA). R had difficulty changing at Thetford station on a journey to Norwich as a footbridge that connects the two platforms was impossible for him to use. The original trial judge had found it was not reasonable for Central Trains to provide a taxi but the CA disagreed. In reaching their conclusion, a three stage test was conceived, with the last question being the most difficult to answer in this instance: is the provision that has been made reasonable? It was ruled that the policy behind the DDA is not a minimalist policy of providing the disabled with some access: it is to provide access as close as is reasonably possible to the public at large.