one to watch ..... SM v. Advocate General For Scotland (On Behalf Of The UK Government) <2009> ScotCS CSOH_91 (25 June 2009)

... case before the courts in scotland in which it's being argued that the exclusion of children under age 3 from entitlement to the mobility component is discriminatory under the Human Rights Convention

the court of session issued a 'decision' in the case yesterday ...

@ http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/2009/2009CSOH91.html

... though it's largely procedural ... and a second hearing is to be arranged to deal with the substantive point ....

I've been reading this, and have lots of clients getting very excited. Personally I'm not convinced it will have such a dramatic effect even if the case is successful. Claimants still have to pass the extra child test of showing they have significant needs above children of their own age. What do other people think?

The reason for reducing the age for mobility to 3 from 5 was I recall that it is the age by which even children with developmental delay are normally walking (if they are ever going to be able to walk), and that most very small children tend to use a pushchair for longer distances anyway.