View source for R (MT) v Oxford City Council (2015) EWHC 795 (Admin), (2015) MHLO 47

''The claimant's application via his deputy to the defendant as homeless was rejected on the basis that his lack of capacity to make such an application meant that there was no duty under Part 7 of the [[Housing Act 1996]]. (1) The claimant's argument that [[Article 14]] (with [[Article 8]]) meant the otherwise-binding House of Lords decision in Garlick should not be followed was unsuccessful. (2) In any event, it is not discriminatory to provide two different systems for provision of accommodation (the system potentially available to MT was at that time s21 [[National Assistance Act 1948]]).''

==External link==
{{#bailii:[2015] EWHC 795 (Admin)}}

[[Media:R (MT) v Oxford City Council (2015) EWHC 795 (Admin), (2015) MHLO 47.pdf|Transcript]]

[[Category:Other capacity cases]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2015 cases]]
[[Category:Judgment available on MHLO]]