Lawyers for a severely disabled Hastings woman are challenging government plans to axe a swathe of post offices - including her local branch - amidst claims that key disability issues were overlooked.
Judy Brown has gone to London's High Court seeking judicial review of a series of decisions by the Royal Mail and two Government ministers which underpin controversial plans to shut down 2,500 post offices nationwide.
Mrs Brown says the Royal Mai
l has targeted 41 post offices for closure in Sussex alone - including three in her home town of Hastings.
The Royal Mail looked into the question of Sussex closures between November and December last year, but has yet to reach a definitive decision.
Under fire in the court case are the post office closure policy formulated by Business Enterprise Secretary, John Hutton, and alleged failures by the Royal Mail to "discharge its duty" under the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act.
Also under attack is a decision made by the Secretary pf State for Work and Pensions to introduce legislation exempting the Royal Mail from laws requiring public bodies to promote equality for the disabled.
Around 45,000 public bodies are covered by disability equality rules, but in April 2007 the Secretary of State amended the existing legislation to remove the Royal Mail from the list of authorities "required to discharge additional specific duties under disability discrimination legislation".
Elisabeth Laing - Ms Brown's QC - claims that none of the public bodies involved in the closure programme has properly looked into the potential impact on the disabled.
Mrs Brown is "severely disabled and elderly" and cares for her mother who is likewise acutely disabled. She needs to use her local branch - Hastings Old Town post office - twice a week, as she has done for the past eight years.
She requires the post office facilities for banking, paying bills, and shopping. Her disabilites prevent her from reaching more distant branches, her lawyers say.
Defence lawyers are opposing Mrs Brown's judicial review challenge, insisting the closure proposals are entirely compatible with the rights of the disabled as well as the "spirit of the law".
Disability issues were specifically addressed in the consultation process, they maintain.
The case, being heard by Mr Justice Davis, continues.
The full article contains 378 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
