How to waste Council Tax

I was very pleased to read this story on the BBC News website, which confirms that Cheltenham Borough Council has lost its ludicrously expensive and potentially vexatious claim against its former managing director, Christine Laird. In fighting the case, the council has spent an amount close to the £1 million it was claiming and was ordered to pay a similar amount to her in costs. The reality is that it had little prospect of success and failed on its facts. The council said she was liable for misrepresentation because she had failed to declare a bout of depression on the health screening part of her application form but the questions that she was asked were too vague to make it clear that this was even relevant.

However, there is a wider point of principle here which was not necessary to decide this particular case but which is likely to arise in the future. In order to show misrepresentation, it must be established that the fact which is hidden is material such that the contracting party would not have entered into the agreement if it had been aware of it. Therefore, the council would have to have shown, in effect, that it would have discriminated against Ms. Laird on the grounds of her past disability. It seems to me that, as a matter of public policy, a fact cannot be said to be material if it would be unlawful to take it into account in deciding whether to form a contract, so the council would have lost whatever it had asked.

This case also highlights the whole problem of health-screening questionnaires in the first place. They are banned in most large EU countries and in the United States of America, making the UK a third world country in its tackling of this issue. The charity Rethink has issued a press release which argues for an amendment to the Equality Bill and their campaign is supported by others in that sector. I wish it well.

Posted in News