I attach a successful decision on this, which I have also sent to the Nearly Legal site. The decision does not give reasons. However, in our submission we argued that Burnip was to be preferred to MA and Others because (a) MA and Others was a Judicial Review looking at the effects of the Bedroom tax as a whole on disabled people in general and (b) in the paragraphs where it did look at the Carmichael case, it did not address the question of whether the Thlimmenos discrimination between a couple, one member of which was disabled, and a couple, neither of whom were disabled, was justified. Instead (paragraph 79) it discussed whether it was justified to treat disabled adults less favourably than disabled children - different kind of discrimination and different comparators. Therefore the tribunal should make its own decision on the facts of the case and did not have to follow MA and Others. Ruth
