Discapacidad

Solapas principales

Caselaw

Arendse c. Arendse y otros, [2012] 4 All SA 305 (WCC) (Sudáfrica)

Una mujer con discapacidad mental, madre de tres hijos, buscó la revocación de una orden de desalojo del hogar familiar obtenida por su ex marido. Al procesar la orden de desalojo, el juez vio que el marido era el propietario registrado de la propiedad y la ex esposa y los hijos la ocupaban a pesar de que él había retirado su consentimiento. El juez reconoció la discapacidad de la mujer, pero sostuvo que tenía una vivienda adecuada alternativa a su disposición, porque podía volver a vivir con sus familiares (lo que ella negó).

The Queen on the Application of Bernard c. London Borough of Enfield, [2002] EWHC 2282 (Admin)

Este caso se refiere a un reclamo de indemnización presentado por una mujer con discapacidades graves, la Sra. Bernard, y su marido (quien era la única persona que se ocupaba de cuidarla), según el cual el Departamento de Vivienda local no les había proporcionado una vivienda adecuada a su discapacidad. Dicha omisión, según se aducía, constituía una violación del Convenio Europeo de los Derechos Humanos (CEDH).

Phakamile Ranelo c. Agencia de Seguridad Social de Sudáfrica [2009] ZAECMHC 7

Phakamile Ranelo presentó una demanda ante el Alto Tribunal Eastern Cape contra la Agencia de Seguridad Social de Sudáfrica aduciendo que el estado había finalizado ilegalmente su subsidio por discapacidad. La legislación sudafricana obligaba a la Agencia de Seguridad Social a informar a Ranelo por escrito sobre la aprobación de un subsidio por discapacidad, su carácter temporal y su derecho a apelar dicho carácter temporal. Ranelo argumentó que no recibió dicha notificación previa, por lo que era válido que creyera que el subsidio era permanente.

Mental Disability Advocacy Centre (MDAC) c. Bulgaria, demanda nro. 41/2007

Mental Disability Advocacy Center presentó ante el Comité Europeo de Derechos Sociales (que juzga el cumplimiento de los Estados de la Carta Social Europea) una demanda para denunciar que los niños que viven en hogares para niños con discapacidades mentales de Bulgaria no reciben educación o, en todo caso, muy poca.

Centre for Legal Resources en nombre de Valentin Câmpeanu c. Rumania¸ solicitud no. 47848/08

El 17 de julio de 2014, el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH) concluyó que el gobierno de Rumania era responsable de violar los derechos humanos de Valentin Câmpeanu, un joven fallecido en 2004 que padecía de serias discapacidades mentales y era VIH positivo. Abandonado al nacer, Câmpeanu vivió en instituciones públicas toda su vida. Cuando cumplió dieciocho años fue transferido a un hogar de asistencia social para adultos y, posteriormente, a un hospital psiquiátrico.

Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania¸ Application no. 47848/08

On 17th July, 2014, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held the Romanian government accountable for violating the human rights of Valentin Câmpeanu, a youth with severe mental disabilities and HIV positive, who died in 2004. Abandoned at birth, he lived in public institutions all his life. When he turned eighteen, he was shifted to a social care home for adults, and afterwards, to a mental hospital. Here, left in isolation, and in the cold, without necessary health care and treatment, and deprived also of food and proper clothing, he died within seven days.

Mental Disability Advocacy Centre (MDAC) v. Bulgaria, Complaint No. 41/2007

The Mental Disability Advocacy Center brought a complaint before the European Committee of Social Rights (which judges compliance of State parties with the European Social Charter) alleging that children living in homes for mentally disabled children (HMDCs) in Bulgaria received little to no education.

Phakamile Ranelo v. South African Social Security Agency [2009] ZAECMHC 7

The applicant Phakamile Ranelo brought a complaint before the Eastern Cape High Court against the South African Social Security Agency alleging that the State had unlawfully terminated his disability grant. South African regulations oblige the Social Security Agency to have informed Ranelo, in writing, of his approval for a disability grant, its temporary nature, and his right to appeal its temporary status. Ranelo argued he received no such prior notice, so his belief in his grant’s permanent nature was valid.

Arendse v. Arendse and Others, [2012] 4 All SA 305 (WCC) (South Africa)

A mentally disabled woman with three children sought to set aside an eviction order from the family home obtained by her former husband. In making the eviction order, the magistrate found that the man was the registered owner of the property and the former wife and the children occupied the home after he had withdrawn his consent. The magistrate acknowledged the woman’s disability, but found that the former wife had suitable alternative accommodation available because she could move back in with her relatives (which she denied).

The Queen on the Application of Bernard v. London Borough of Enfield, [2002] EWHC 2282 (Admin)

This case concerns a claim for damages by a woman with severe disabilities, Mrs. Bernard and her husband, Mr. Bernard, her sole caregiver, alleging that the local Housing Department did not provide them with accommodations suitably adapted for her disability. This failure, it was contended, constituted a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Damages were sought under the Human Rights Act (HRA), which is the implementing legislation for the ECHR in the UK.