Has anyone come across any caselaw in relation to Dla and anosmia (loss of sense of smell). So far I have drawn a blank but think that there is a strong argument for L/R care (cooking test)on the grounds below:

1) Such a disability prevents a person from identifying food which is off (eg meat,fish,dairy products).

2)Smell is a invaluable aid to cooking and it's absence will mean that the disabled person will not be alerted to burning food.

3)The disturbance of taste that accompanies loss of smell will mean that the disabled person will be unable to tell if the cooked food is of edible quality.

Views on the arguments most welcome too.

Thanks
Mick

I don't have any caselaw, but I did have a client who suffered anosmia following head injury. We used arguments similar to those you suggest, and client was awarded LRCC. Client had a gas cooker, and was unable to detect that gas tap had been left on but unlit (head injury also resulted in loss of short-term memory) and there was danger of explosion.

I'm with Ruth on this. I think that for most cooking activities it will probably have to be combined with some other disability that means that they can't check sell-by dates, remember to watch the stove, etc. Shame though as half the joy of cooking is the smells!

Is there caselaw suggesting that the hypothetical cooking test assumed that they had been provided with ingredients? I seem to remember that. Would you have to find a way round the argument that if we are assuming ingredients then we have to assume that they are usable?

Sorry to be so negative at this time of the morning. Personally I would give it a go anyway and not be surprised either way by the result.

S72(1)(a)(ii) of the C&B Act

he cannot prepare a main meal for himself if he has the ingredients.

Doh! Why worry about caselaw when I should know the legislation.

Ah but the legislation is ambiguous which is precisely why we need the caselaw! Looking forward to hearing from Warren.

Thanks Warren but can you expand?

Mick

HI Mick,

Not come up with anything hard and fast and not had a chance to have a dig about yet, but.....

Could an arguement be made from CDLA1471/2004 'safety + cooking' following moyna? Or R(DLA01/97 'Reasonableness', and CDLA/450/1995 for attention?

Been a while since I have had direct involvement with DLA challenges but will keep ferreting and see if I can come up with anything!

And if Tom Taylor is still working with you tell him I said it was time he retired!

Neil.

Mick,

I wasn't making any particular point just showing the legislation refers to having the ingredients.
Regards
Warren

Thanks Warren, but does that mean they are in the kitchen (so as to exclude shopping) or does it mean that they are of edible quality at the point of making the meal? I don't know but suspect that the 'available' bit is there for the former reason rather than the latter. Hansard anybody?
If I am wrong on this the burning issue would be ......the burning issue.

Had second thoughts on those decisions don't think the Anosmia will be enough on its own for most tribunals. Will continue to ponder and get the local cabal (or should that be coven?) of advice workers to mull it over.

Thanks Neil and everyone else so far. Tommys retired but we are still in touch and I'm pleased to report he's as daft as ever. We may have him back as an elected member in May. I'll let him know you have been in touch.