Income Support – Asylum seeker Citations: [2006] UKSSCSC CIS – 926 – 2005 Links: Bailii Statutes: Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Benefits Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.249750
The Secretary of State had introduced regulations which excluded the statutory right to payment of ‘urgent case’ benefits for asylum seekers who had not claimed asylum immediately upon arrival, or whose claims for asylum had been rejected, and who were awaiting appeal. Held: Leaving asylum applicants without benefits defeated the purpose of the asylum laws. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security Ex Parte B and the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants: CA 27 Jun 1996
The claimant was an EC national who had become resident here but was not seeking work, since she cared for her children. The Secretary of State said that since she was not seeking work, she was not entitled to remain and should make arrangements to leave the UK. Held: The letter asking a claimant to … Continue reading Chief Adjudication Officer v Wolke; Remelien v Secretary of State for Social Security: HL 13 Nov 1997
A disapplication of the restriction on claiming housing benefit must be for an event which takes place after the claim. Wife not entitled to more mortgage support benefit than had been paid as housing benefit. Citations: Independent 13-Jul-1995, Times 05-Jul-1995 Statutes: Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 10-1 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Benefits Updated: 21 January … Continue reading Kaur v Chief Adjudication Officer: CA 5 Jul 1995
Mrs. Nessa arrived at Heathrow aged 55 having lived all her life in Bangladesh. Her husband, Mr. Mobarak Ali, had lived in the United Kingdom from 1962 until he died in 1975 and when she arrived here, Mrs. Nessa had a right of abode. She hoped to live with her husband’s brother. Her three children, … Continue reading Nessa v Chief Adjudication Officer: HL 3 Nov 1999
Income Support Citations: [2006] UKSSCSC CIS – 2317 – 2006 Links: Bailii Statutes: Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 15(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Benefits Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.249721
The claimant owned a half share in a property. It was said that this brought her disposable capital above the limit to make a claim. She had inherited it, but had transferred it to her brother in satisfaction of her mother’s wishes. Judges: Lord Justice Evans, Lord Justice Potter and Lord Justice Mummery Citations: [2000] … Continue reading Wilkinson v Chief Adjudication Officer: CA 24 Mar 2000
The claimant said that the 1987 Regulations were invalid, in making invalid any claim for benefits by an asylum seeker who had not made his application exactly upon entry to the UK. Held: The appeals were allowed. Section 11 of the 1971 Act is a highly technical provision which for the purposes of immigration control … Continue reading Kola and Another v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 28 Nov 2007
Regulations providing that a student stayed such until he concluded, or was dismissed from a course, were deeming provisions, and a student taking a year out after failing his exams, remained a student and was unable to claim benefits by way of income support. Article 2 did not require the state to subsidise a student … Continue reading O’Connor v Chief Adjudication Officer and Another: CA 11 Mar 1999
(Northern Ireland) The claimant challenged the rules restricting payment of benefits to nationals from the 8 latest European Accession states to those with an unbroken 12 month working record. The applicant came from Poland and worked at two authorised employments but failed to find a third. She had left her partner because of his violence. … Continue reading Zalewska v Department for Social Development: HL 12 Nov 2008
The 1987 Regulations provided additional benefits for disabled persons, but excluded from benefit those who had nowhere to sleep. The claimant said this was irrational. He had been receiving the disability premium to his benefits, but this was cancelled when he lost his home. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The disabilty premium, as part of … Continue reading RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 22 Oct 2008
The Authority was not entitled to have deducted from the sums payable toward the claimant’s social care, an award of damages made against the authority from its own negligence in the care of his mother, leading to his disability. The phrase ‘An award of damages for a personal injury’ in paragraph 44(2)(a) was clear, unambiguous … Continue reading Peters v East Midlands Strategic Health Authority and Another: CA 3 Mar 2009
The court considered the arrangements for providing public support for the costs of funerals. The claimant’s son had died whilst she was in prison. Assistance had been refused because, as a prisoner, she was not receiving benefits. She complained that the refusal violated her right not to be discriminated against. Held: The prisoner’s appeal failed. … Continue reading Stewart v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 29 Jul 2011
The claimant entered the UK as a student coming from Poland. She then worked as a kitchen maid, but having left that job on becoming a mother was refused income support. She later returned to work. She said that the rules which denied her benefit were inconsistent with articles 12 (discrimination on the grounds of … Continue reading Kaczmarek v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 27 Nov 2008
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 no means of contacting them. Held: Deciding a … Continue reading Kerr v Department for Social Development (Northern Ireland): HL 6 May 2004
The appellant challenged the withdrawal of her benefits payments. She had applied for asylum, and been granted reduced rate income support. A decision was made refusing her claim, but that decision was, by policy, not communicated to her for several months, during which time her benefits were cancelled. Held: The result was to leave the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Anufrijeva: HL 26 Jun 2003
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts