The applicants sought judicial review of the failures by the respondent in processing claims for benefits. They asked that there should be a declaration that the respondent had a duty to refer a claim to an adjudication officer as soon as it was received, that he should have the information needed to process the claim, and that it be dealt with within 14 days or as soon as was reasonably practicable.
Held: The claimant group had a sufficient interest or standing to be entitled to seek a judicial review. No declaration should be made. An adjudication officer may himself make enquiries when setting a claim, and need not consider only matters internal to the claim.
Citations:
[1990] 2 QB 540, [1989] 1 All ER 1047
Statutes:
Social Security Act 1975 98 99(1)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Kerr v Department for Social Development (Northern Ireland) HL 6-May-2004
Wrongful Refusal of Benefits
The claimant was estranged from his family, but claimed re-imbursement of the expenses for his brother’s funeral. The respondent required him to establish that none of his siblings was in a better position than he to pay for the funeral, but he had . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte World Development Movement Ltd QBD 1995
A British consortium looked for assistance in providing a hydro-electric project on the Pergau river. One interested government department advised that it was not economical and an abuse of the overseas aid programme, but the respondent decided to . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ex Parte the World Development Movement Ltd Admn 10-Nov-1994
The Movement sought to challenge decisions of the Secretary of state to give economic aid to the Pergau Dam, saying that it was not required ‘for the purpose of promoting the development’ of Malaysia. It was said to be uneconomic and damaging. It . .
Cited – Black, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice Admn 5-Mar-2015
The serving prisoner said that new general restrictions on smoking in public buildings applied also in prisons. were a breach of his human rights. The only spaces where prisoners were allowed now to smoke were their cells, and he would share cells . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Benefits, Administrative
Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.196895
