Housing law practitioners will be familiar with the appointment of Equality Act assessors when a disability discrimination defence goes to trial. Genevieve Screeche-Powell discusses how the recent judgment in Laidley v Metropolitan Housing Trust Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 448 impacts the requirement to disclose the advice of these and other court-appointed assessors.
In the possession proceedings of Laidley v Metropolitan Housing Trust, the tenant raised an interesting question. Did transparency require disclosure of the assessor’s advice to the parties?
Unusually for a housing case, reliance was placed on maritime case-law.
Background to the possession proceedings
The tenant in anti-social behaviour possession proceedings lacked capacity and was disabled because of a delusional disorder. The Official Solicitor acted on his behalf.
At the tenant’s request, an assessor was appointed to sit with the trial judge.
Section 114 of the Equality Act 2010 directs a county court to appoint an assessor (using its powers under s.63(1) County Court Act 1984) unless the judge is satisfied there is good reason for not doing so.
Section 63 of the County Court Act 1984 gives a judge power to summons to his/her assistance someone of “skill and assistance in the matter to which the proceedings relate” and act as assessors.
The trial judge, upheld by the High Court, refused disclosure, considering the role of a nautical expert entirely different to that of an Equality Act assessor.
A possession order was made.
The appeal
On a further appeal, whilst noting many allegations of discrimination failed on the evidence, the Court of Appeal gave useful guidance on the approach to adopt to the role of assessors and the circumstances in which disclosure may be required.
- The role of an assessor is not rigidly defined. A judge has a broad discretion about precisely what assistance they ask the assessor to provide.
- The assessor’s assistance will typically involve bringing their expertise to bear in assisting the judge with the evaluation of evidence as it applied to particular issue (although it need not be limited to that).
- It is a fundamental principle of natural justice and fairness that parties to adversarial litigation know the case they have to meet and be given a fair opportunity to respond.
- If the contribution of an assessor leads the court into a new area or argument that would affect its decision and of which the parties have not had notice, fairness may require that contribution be disclosed.
- IF the assessor’s role is assisting in the evaluation of evidence, there is no general obligation of disclosure.
- In this legal context, there is no freestanding obligation to define the role of the assessor before trial. Attempting to define the issues more closely runs the risk of constraining the usefulness of their role.
If a judge is in doubt as to the requirements of fairness, they should lean towards disclosure, so no risk of unfairness remains.
What does the judgment mean for housing practitioners?
Litigation generally goes in trends, so expect to see this issue rear its head in the County Court. However, this judgment is clear and should provide a complete answer.