1. (in ordinary langauage) in a disability discrimination case, the defence of justifiying a failure to make reasonable adjustments requires a higher standard than the defence of showing that the reason why an individual was treated less favourably was something other than his disability;
   
2. (in technical language) the test for justification under DDA 1995 s.5(4) differs from the test of justification under DDA s.5(3) (as interpreted by the Court of Appeal in Jones v The Post Office CA 2001 EWCA Civ 558) of discrimination taking the form of less favourable treatment of a disabled person in breach of DDA s.5(1).
   

editor's note:
As pointed out by Sedley LJ in the present case, the justification defence afforded by Disability Discrimination Act 1995 s.5(4) in respect of the duty to make adjustments will be removed from the DDA with effect from 1 October 2004 by the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (Amendment) Regulations 2003 SI 2003/1673. The basic justification defence afforded by s.5(3) will, however, remain. It follows that the importance of the present case may be shortlived.

For relevant general notes see Disability Discrimination/Disability Discrimination Act 1995/defence of justification .