In 2005, due to fiscal pressures, the Ministry of Health decided to stop funding day services for people with intellectual disabilities who were over 65. Idea Services successfully challenged this decision at the Human Rights Review Tribunal, with the Tribunal finding that the decision to stop funding was unjustified discrimination on the grounds of age. The Tribunal's decision was appealed to the High Court. The High Court dismissed the appeal. It agreed with the Tribunal's finding that the decision to stop funding was discriminatory on the basis of age, and that the discrimination was not justified. In particular, the High Court noted that there were "reasonable alternatives available to the [Ministry] which were non-discriminatory", and that the Ministry's decision was a "blanket prohibition" that was not a "proportionate response at the time it was made, in the absence of consideration of other alternatives". However, in contrast to the Tribunal's finding, the High Court concluded that the decision to stop funding did not breach the funding contract between the Ministry and Idea Services, as "[t]he principles set out in the contract...do not bear upon whether the [Ministry] is contractually obliged to fund the day services...[t]hey are about IDEA Services' responsibilities, not the [Ministry's] commitment to funding". The Ministry also succeeded in an appeal against the costs that had been awarded by the Tribunal. Attorney General v Idea Services (in Stat Man) [2012] NZHC 3229