The appellant’s mental health – matters to be considered in addressing the question of eligibility under Regulation 3(2)(b) of the 2005 Regulations.
Examination of the issue of whether, in the alternative, withdrawal of support would lead to a breach of the appellant’s human rights.
In the alternative, the question of the extent to which the appellant’s mental health vulnerabilities were relevant to an evaluation of the requirement to take “all reasonable steps” as set out in Regulation 3(2)(a).
Read the full decision in
Published 8 February 2017