A disabled teenager who took on Edinburgh banking giant Royal Bank of Scotland after it failed to cater for his needs won a landmark legal challenge today.

David Allen, 17, who has muscular dystrophy, launched legal action against the the bank after they failed to implement wheelchair access at the Church Street branch in Sheffield.

At Sheffield County Court today, Judge John Dowse ruled the bank had breached the Disability Discrimination Act.

In addition to paying £6,500 in damages the bank has until the end of September to install a platform lift.

It is the first ruling of its kind and has set a legal precedent which could have implications for other service providers, legal experts said.

The bank claimed that it had complied with the Disability Right's Commissions' Code of Practice and that it had arranged access to three other branches.

In addition the bank offered Mr Allen the use of telephone or internet banking services.

However, Judge Dowse criticised the bank adding: "The bank has made errors in this case causing David considerable embarrassment.

"It has not covered itself in glory."

At hearing the Court's decision, Mr Allen said: "I'm glad justice has been done.

"I only wanted them to comply with the law and provide disabled access so I could get into my bank like my friends."

Barrister Declan O'Dempsey, discrimination specialist from Cloisters, said: "Businesses are required under the Goods and Services provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act to make "reasonable adjustments" to ensure that their customers can use their services."

"These adjustments can include making alterations to buildings. Where companies have already made some changes to their outlets, it has not been clear how much more they have to do."

"In addition, up until now no company has been forced by injunction to make a physical adjustment to ensure that disabled people have equal access to their services.

"This ruling changes that. Bigger companies now know that it is up to them to anticipate the needs of all their customers; and it will be up to them to prove why they have not ensured equal access to their services for all their clients."

"They cannot assume that because they have made changes to some premises, their obligations end there."

A spokesperson for RBS said: "RBS strongly disagrees with the Court's Judgment and will accordingly be pursuing its right of Appeal.

The Bank is committed to meeting the requirements of its disabled customers and its obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

It believes it has taken every possible step to meet Mr Allen's concerns over access to his branch, in full compliance with its legal obligations. Pending the outcome of any appeal, it would be inappropriate to comment further."