s.149 duty is proactive. Zero evidence of consideration. Bracking standard.
Section 149 EA 2010 imposes a duty to have due regard. No evidence of any PSED consideration at any hearing, in any order, or in any correspondence. The duty is proactive, not reactive.
What the opponent will argue, and why they are wrong.
PSED is a process duty, not an outcome duty. The court considered equality but did not need to make a separate record.
There is NO evidence of any PSED consideration at any hearing, in any order, or in any correspondence. Not a single mention. Bracking v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWCA Civ 1345: PSED requires 'rigorous' consideration, not lip service. The complete absence of any reference to equality, disability, or adjustments across all proceedings proves the duty was not discharged.
Judges exercise PSED implicitly through the overriding objective and fair trial requirements.
Section 149 requires DUE REGARD, which demands conscious, rigorous engagement. R (Gerber) v Wiltshire: continuing omissions extend JR time limit. The PSED cannot be discharged implicitly or unconsciously. It requires evidence of active consideration. No such evidence exists across any of the 28 decisions.
Logged and scheduled. 12 requests across 6 courts, 7 judges. 0 granted.
Fallback: PSED is proactive. The burden is on HMCTS to show due regard. Complete absence of evidence is itself the evidence.
Independence: Partially dependent on other grounds succeeding.