Discrimination and the "spare room subsidy": an analysis of Carmichael

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review


Examines the Supreme Court ruling in R. (on the application of Carmichael) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on whether the bedroom tax was discriminatory. Reflects on possible problems involving the court's approach to the "manifestly without reasonable foundation" test, the transparent medical need for an additional bedroom, the relevant international duties, and the hazards of the discretionary payments scheme.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)24-29
JournalJournal of Housing Law
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Cite this