Croydon and Another v AW, A and Y, Regina (on the Application of): CA 4 Apr 2007

The authority appealed a finding that it was responsible to provide support to an able bodied asylum seeker who was destitute but whose human rights would be infringed by the absence of support.
Held: Where the asylum seeker was able bodied, the responsibility fell on central government, but where he was infirm it would fall on the local authority.

Judges:

Judge LJ P, Laws LJ, Scott Baker LJ

Citations:

Times 11-May-2007, [2007] EWCA Civ 266

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromAW, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon; A D Y v London Borough of Hackney and Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 16-Dec-2005
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Benefits

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251142

(Un-named) (Armed Forces Pension): SSCS 20 Oct 2006

Whether a person in a marriage-like relationship with a former member of the armed forces whose death is due to service is entitled to a pension under the Naval, Military and Air Force Etc (Disablement and Death) Service Pensions Order 1983 although she does not meet the conditions of Article 29 (pensions to widows and widowers) or Article 30 (pensions to certain unmarried dependants who lived as spouses). The argument for entitlement is based on interpreting those provisions so as not to contravene the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and in particular Article 14 on discrimination.

Citations:

[2006] UKSSCSC CAF – 52 – 2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Armed Forces, Benefits

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.249711

Secretary of State for the Home Department, Regina (on the Application of) v Chief Asylum Support Adjudicator and Another: Admn 25 Oct 2002

The asylum seeker had sought support from the Secretary of State. That assistance had been granted subject to a condition that she live where directed. She sought to appeal.
Held: There was no right of appeal against the condition. The jurisdiction must come from section 103(2). That section made it clear that a right of appeal lay only of the support was stopped. There had to be two decisions, a grant of and a withdrawal of support. There was no pre-existing support grant to support an appeal.

Judges:

Silber J

Citations:

Times 29-Nov-2002, Gazette 19-Dec-2002, [2002] EWHC 2218 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 95 103(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina (Secretary of State for the Home Department) v Chief Asylum Support Adjudicator and Another (Ahment Godan) CA 28-Oct-2003
The applicant was an asylum applicant. She sought to appeal a decision to stop support payments. She appealed a decision that she had no right to appeal.
Held: A decision which might give rise to an appeal only occurred if the applicant had an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Benefits

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.178021

Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security ex parte Sherwin (a Patient By Her Next Friend Sherwin): Admn 16 Feb 1996

An official in the Benefits Agency, part of the Department of Health and Social Security, suspended an income support/severe disability premium payable to the appellant. The court was asked whether the decision of the Agency, made under the authority of its chief executive, was to be regarded, as a matter of law, as the decision of the Secretary of State. The court examined the Framework document setting out the position of the Agency in relation to the DHSS which ‘acts on behalf of and in accordance with any directions, where appropriate, of the Secretary of State’. Ministers – the Framework provided – remain accountable to Parliament for the full range of their responsibilities.
Held:
After a close examination of the inter-relationship between the Agency and the Department, Lord Justice Kennedy concluded: ‘In my judgment, in the context of this case, the creation of the Benefits Agency has had no effect whatsoever on the operation of the Carltona principle. In addition to the cases to which I have referred, Mr Drabble referred us to a number of academic writings which I have read with interest. At the end of the day I came back to what was said by Lord Griffiths in Oladehinde. The decision was taken by a person of suitable seniority in the Agency (which was itself within the DSS) and it was taken by a person for whom the Secretary of State accepts responsibility. Therefore the Carltona principle applies.’
Latham J added: ‘There may be circumstances in which an agency is established in such a way that a minister could no longer, on any sensible analysis, be accountable to Parliament for its actions. The report of the Efficiency Unit was alive to that particular problem. In my judgment however the Benefits Agency has been established in a way which does not create any such difficulty. The use of the word ‘delegate’ was perhaps unfortunate but it has to be read in context. The intention was to ensure that the administration of benefits was located within a structure which, so far as possible, was a recognisable entity with lines of managerial responsibility intended to make it effective. That did not affect the constitutional position when, in accordance with the guidance which I have set out above, Mr Ash exercised the Secretary of State’s power under Regulation 37. That power was exercised by Mr Ash as a civil servant within the Department of Social Security on the authority of the Secretary of State in circumstances where the Secretary of State was answerable to Parliament.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy and Mr Justice Latham

Citations:

CO/1724/95, (1996) 32 BMLR 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCastle v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 24-Jan-2014
The defendant appealed from his conviction for having driven in excess of a variable speed limit on the motorway. He said that the Order under which the speed limit had been imposed was irregular. . .
CitedBourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Benefits

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.140391

Hetoja, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 24 Oct 2002

The applicant was an asylum seeker reliant upon the respondent for housing, being otherwise destitute. She sought housing which would not split up her extended family. She claimed that the regulations excluded from the respondent’s decision making process an element, her right to respect for family life, which he was obliged under the Convention to have regard to.
Held: The regulations required the respondent not to take account of the applicant’s own personal preferences. This did not prevent him having proper regard for her circumstances, including the factors which she sought to have reflected, in his duty to provide adequate accommodation. The regulations did not conflict with her rights.

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

Times 11-Nov-2002, [2002] EWHC 2146 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 , Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 97(2), Asylum Support Regulations 2000 (2000 No 704) 13(2)(a), European Convention on Human Rights Art 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Benefits, Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.178016

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Wilson: CA 29 Jun 2006

The claimant sought housing benefit. He had married a Thai lady who had not yet received permission to remain in this country, having entered promising not to make a call on public funds.
Held: The authority was correct to refuse benefit where the claimant gave only one National Insurance Number. This was a claim for two people.

Judges:

Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Moore-Bick Lord Justice Richards

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 882, Times 04-Jul-2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Administration Act 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.242903

(Un-named) MA DLS: SSCS 12 Apr 2006

Mobility allowance; disability living allowance – in the absence of any valid supersession decision or decisions, the Secretary of State had no power to determine that any overpayment of either mobility allowance or disability living allowance was recoverable from the claimant.

Citations:

[2006] UKSSCSC CDLA – 2999 – 2004

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.242837

(Un-named) Retirement pensions: UTAA 12 Mar 2009

Judges:

Jupp J

Citations:

[2009] UKUT 49 (AAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromTimbrell v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 22-Jun-2010
The claimant had undertaken male to female treatment including surgery and lived as a woman, though continuing to live with her wife. She sought payment of a pension at 60, but was refused. The regulations required a gender recognition certificate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.375639

(Un-named) (DLA) CDLA – 1365 – 2005: SSCS 22 Mar 2006

The commissioners were asked whether and the extent to which the effects of alcohol consumption are relevant in determining entitlement to disability living allowance (‘DLA’), particularly where the relevant effects are the immediate and transient consequences of that consumption.

Citations:

[2006] UKSSCSC CDLA – 1365 – 2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241264

Richards v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Social Policy): ECJ 27 Apr 2006

Ms Richards, previously a married male, had undergone gender re-assignment surgery. She remained married thereafter. Ms Richards applied to the DWP for a pension from the age of 60. That was refused by the Secretary of State for the Department of Work and Pensions (‘SSWP’), so Ms Richards appealed to a Social Security Commissioner. In October 2004 the Commissioner applied to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling on whether the SSWP’s refusal was lawful under the terms of Council Directive 79/7/ EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security.
Held: On the correct interpretation of Articles 4 and 7 of Directive 79/7/EC the refusal of a retirement pension to a male to female transsexual until the age of 65 was prohibited if that person would have been entitled to such a pension at the age of 60 had she been held to be a woman as a matter of national law. Ms Richards was entitled to receive a state pension from the age of 60.

Citations:

Times 05-May-2006, C-423/04, [2006] EUECJ C-423/04, [2006] ECR I-3585, [2006] Fam Law 639, [2006] 3 FCR 229, [2006] 2 CMLR 49, [2006] CEC 637, [2006] Pens LR 123, [2006] ICR 1181, [2006] 2 FLR 487, [2006] All ER (EC) 895

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 79/7/ EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

CitedTimbrell v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 22-Jun-2010
The claimant had undertaken male to female treatment including surgery and lived as a woman, though continuing to live with her wife. She sought payment of a pension at 60, but was refused. The regulations required a gender recognition certificate . .
CitedMB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 5-Jul-2016
The court was asked about the age at which entitlement to a pension began for someone of transgender.
Held: The court was divided, and the issue was referred to the European Court of Justice. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Benefits

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241324

(Un-named) Incapacity Benefit: NISSCS 18 Feb 1998

Application by the claimant for leave to appeal against the decision of a Social Security Appeal Tribunal which held that claimant was not entitled to incapacity benefit from and including 10 June 1996 as he only scored 12 points in the All Work Test.

Citations:

[1998] NISSCSC C15/98(IB)

Links:

Bailii

Northern Ireland, Benefits

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.240718

Collins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 4 Apr 2006

The claimant had dual Irish and US nationality. He therefore also was a citizen of the EU. He complained that the British rules against payment of job seekers’ allowance were discriminatory. The matter had already been to the ECJ.
Held: The residence test as applied was not in contravention of EU law. ‘[T]he proper interpretation of the ECJ’s judgment, read as a whole, is that a requirement that there should be a ‘genuine link between an applicant for an allowance in the nature of a social advantage . . and the geographic market in question’ (see ibid. paragraph 67) is not synonymous with a requirement that the applicant should be actively (i.e. genuinely) seeking work in that market at the material time; and that in the context of an application for such an allowance a ‘genuine link’ requirement may (subject always to questions of justification and proportionality) be legitimately imposed by a member state in addition to an ‘actively seeking work’ requirement.’ At the same time ‘it was in principle legitimate for the national legislature to wish to ensure that there was a ‘real link’ between the applicant for that allowance and the geographic employment market in question. ‘

Judges:

Brooke LJ, Jonathan Parker LJ, Maurice Kay LJ

Citations:

Times 02-May-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 376

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations 1996 85(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCollins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions ECJ 23-Mar-2004
ECJ Freedom of movement for persons – Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC) – Concept of ‘worker’ – Social security allowance paid to jobseekers – Residence requirement – Citizenship . .
CitedSwaddling v Adjudication Officer ECJ 25-Feb-1999
A national of a member state having returned home after working abroad, and declaring an intention not to seek work abroad again, and applying for benefits could not be refused on the grounds that he had not been there long enough.
CitedSylvie Lair v Universitat Hannover ECJ 21-Jun-1988
European law draws a distinction between member state nationals who have not yet entered into an employment relationship in the host member state where they are looking for work and those who are already working in that state or who, having worked . .
CitedCollins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions ECJ 23-Mar-2004
ECJ Freedom of movement for persons – Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC) – Concept of ‘worker’ – Social security allowance paid to jobseekers – Residence requirement – Citizenship . .
CitedNessa v Chief Adjudication Officer HL 3-Nov-1999
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 . .
CitedCentre Public D’Aide Sociale De Courcelles v Lebon ECJ 18-Jun-1987
A right to equal treatment with regard to social and tax advantages accorded by article 7(2) of Regulation No. 1612/68 E.E.C. applied only to workers and not to nationals of Member States who move in search of employment. The latter were entitled . .
CitedCommission v Belgium ECJ 12-Sep-1996
ECJ By making the grant of tideover allowances to young people seeking their first employment subject to the requirement of having completed their secondary education in an establishment subsidized or approved by . .
CitedGrzelczyk v Centre public d’aide sociale d’Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve ECJ 20-Sep-2001
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: Tribunal du travail de Nivelles – Belgium. Articles 6, 8 and 8a of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 12 EC, 17 EC and 18 EC) – Council Directive 93/96/EEC – . .
CitedO’Flynn v Adjudication Officer ECJ 23-May-1996
A condition on the making of a funeral grant that the deceased be buried in that country was unlawful. Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community precludes a rule of a Member State which makes grant . .
CitedCriminal Proceedings Against Bickel and Franz ECJ 1-Dec-1998
Where a court had specific rules allowing a case against its own citizens to be heard in their own language, the same facility must be offered to an accused visiting from another member state. . .
CitedCommission v Italy C-388/01 ECJ 16-Jan-2003
Europe Failure to fulfil obligations – Free movement of services – Non-discrimination – Articles 12 EC and 49 EC – Admission to museums, monuments, galleries, archaeological digs, parks and gardens classified as . .
CitedD’Hoop v Office National de l’Emploi ECJ 11-Jul-2002
Europa Citizenship of the Union – Principle of non-discrimination – National legislation granting the right to tideover allowances to its nationals only on condition that they have completed their secondary . .
CitedRegina (Bidar) v Ealing London Borough Council and Another ECJ 15-Mar-2005
Europa (Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union) Citizenship of the Union – Articles 12 EC and 18 EC – Assistance for students in the form of subsidised loans – Provision limiting the grant of . .
CitedIn re J (a Minor) (Abduction: Custody rights) HL 1-Jul-1990
On 21 March 1990 the mother removed the child, aged two, from Australia, where he had been habitually resident, to England with the intention of permanently residing here. She did so without the knowledge of the father who also resided in Australia . .
CitedGarcia Avello v Belgian State ECJ 2-Oct-2003
Europa Citizenship of the European Union – Handing down of surnames – Children of nationals of Member States – Dual nationality. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, European

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240098

Esfandiari and others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 23 Mar 2006

The claimant argued that the funeral benefits regime unlawfully discriminated against migrants because the 1987 Regulations did not permit payments to be made for a burial abroad, except as provided for by EU law.
Held: The argument was rejected. Considerations of cost and administrative convenience can be good reasons capable of justifying discrimination. Carnwath LJ said: ‘Decisions on the allocation of public funds for such purposes are questions of social policy, not law. If justification is required, the considerations set out in the evidence of the Secretary of State, in summary that an amended scheme would be more complex and more costly to administer, are not irrational, and are well within the ‘margin of appreciation’ allowed by Strasbourg jurisprudence.’

Judges:

Carnwath LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 282

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoEsfandiari and others v Secretary of State for Works and Pensions CA 6-Oct-2005
. .

Cited by:

CitedStewart v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 29-Jul-2011
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.239217

Steele, Regina (on the Application of) v Birmingham City Council and The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 16 Dec 2005

The claimant had received an overpayment of benefits (Job seeker’s allowance), but then was made bankrupt. He now said that this was a debt in the bankruptcy.
Held: It was not. At the date of the bankruptcy order, the possible reclaim was not yet a contingent debt, and he remained liable. There was no contingent lability until the Secretary of State made his determination.
Arden LJ said that the result would have been the same if at the date of the bankruptcy there had existed a separate liability at common law to repay the benefit overpaid, from which Mr Steele would have been released by his discharge from bankruptcy: ‘I do not consider that those liabilities should be treated as a single, continuing liability for the purposes of section 281(1) of the 1986 Act’.

Judges:

Sir Martin Nourse, Arden LJ

Citations:

[2006] 1 WLR 2380, [2005] EWCA Civ 1824, Times 26-Apr-2006, [2007] 1 All ER 73

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Administration Act 1992 71(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedGlenister v Rowe CA 21-Apr-1999
The claimant sued for breach of trust. The action was re-instated after being struck out for want of prosecution, but in the meantime the defendant had been made bankrupt and then discharged from bankruptcy. An order for costs was then made which . .
Appeal fromSteele, Regina (on the Application Of) v Birmingham City Council Admn 19-Apr-2005
Action to recover overpayment of benefits: ‘whether overpaid social security benefits constitute a ‘bankruptcy debt’, and, if so, whether the benefits authorities are entitled to continue to recover overpaid social security benefits by way of . .

Cited by:

CitedSecretary of State for Work and Pensions v Balding CA 13-Dec-2007
The Secretary of State appealed a decision that its reclaim of overpayments of benefit were no longer possible after the discharge from insolvency of the claimant. The overpayment had been reclaimed before bankruptcy.
Held: At the time of the . .
CitedHaine v Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and Another; Day v Haine CA 11-Jun-2008
Former employees had obtained a protective award against the company for failing to consult on the impending redundancies and submitted proofs of debt to the liquidator who sought guidance from the court. The judge had held that since the Act . .
CitedHaine v Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and Another; Day v Haine CA 11-Jun-2008
Former employees had obtained a protective award against the company for failing to consult on the impending redundancies and submitted proofs of debt to the liquidator who sought guidance from the court. The judge had held that since the Act . .
CitedCasson and Another v The Law Society Admn 20-Oct-2009
Two solicitors had been made bankrupt and then discharged from bankruptcy. They suffered adjudications by the SDT awarding compensation for matters occurring before the bankruptcies. They appealed, saying that the awards were bankruptcy debts from . .
CitedMcCartney and Unite The Union and Another v Nortel Networks UK Ltd (In Administration) ChD 22-Apr-2010
The administrators gave employees of the company notice of termination of their employment. Then administrators refused consent under para 43(6) to actions against the company in the Northern Ireland Industrial Tribunal for protective awards, unfair . .
CitedIn re Nortel Companies and Others SC 24-Jul-2013
The court was asked as to the interrelationship of the statutory schemes relating to the protection of employees’ pensions and to corporate insolvency.
Held: Liabilities which arose from financial support directions or contribution notices . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Insolvency

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.239233

L.H. Piatkowski v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst grote ondernemingen Eindhoven (Social Security For Migrant Workers): ECJ 9 Mar 2006

ECJ Freedom of movement for workers – Social security – Person simultaneously employed in one Member State and self-employed in another Member State – Person subject to the social security legislation of each of those States – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Article 14cb) and Annex VII – Social security contributions levied on interest paid by a company established in one Member State to a person resident in another Member State.

Citations:

C-493/04, [2005] EUECJ C-493/04

Links:

Bailii

European, Benefits

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.239172

Chief Adjudication Officer and Another v Steane and Another: SSCS 24 Jul 1996

Citations:

[1996] UKSSCSC CA – 60 – 1993

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoSteane and Another v Chief Adjudication Officer and Another CA 19-Dec-1995
Attendance allowance could be granted to a care resident who didn’t apply via the Local Authority Social Services department.
Attendance allowance payable to elderly person on transfer of nursing home into the private sector. . .

Cited by:

See AlsoSteane v Chief Adjudication Officer and Another HL 8-Aug-1996
Since no payments had been made by the Local Authority for care, a care home resident was entitled to claim Attendance Allowance.
Occupant of residential home paying charges himself may get attendance allowance. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.197453

Walker-Fox v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 29 Nov 2005

The claimant pensioner had moved to France. He sought to claim a retrospective winter fuel allowance claim. The government had eventually agreed to make payments to UK residents abroad.
Held: The claimant was deemed to have had knowledge of the change in regulations and could not make a retrospective claim: ‘the orthodox position is that in order to comply with the principle of equivalence, the national time limit must apply equally to national claims as to Community-based claims. It must comply with the principle of effectiveness, that is to say, it must not make reliance on Community law virtually impossible or excessively difficult and a reasonable time limit will not fall foul of that principle. The imposition of time-limits is an application of the principle of legal certainty which protects both the individual and the administration. If that orthodoxy applies to this case, Mr Walker-Fox loses. ‘

Judges:

Ward, Scott Baker LJJ, Sir Peter Gibson

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1441, Times 08-Dec-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Fund Winter Fuel Payment Regulations 1998, Social Fund Winter Fuel Payment Regulations 2000 2(1) 3(1), Council Regulation No 1408/71

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedAmministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato v Spa San Giorgio ECJ 9-Nov-1983
ECJ Questions submitted for a preliminary ruling – reference to the court – right of every national court – stage of the proceedings before the national court – nature of the decision to be given by the national . .
CitedEmmott v Minister for Social Welfare and Attorney General ECJ 25-Jul-1991
Europa So long as a directive has not been properly transposed into national law, individuals are unable to ascertain the full extent of their rights. That state of uncertainty for individuals subsists even after . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Social Security Ex Parte Taylor ECJ 16-Dec-1999
The government made additional payments to pensioners in respect of the additional fuel costs incurred in winter. The complainant asserted that as a man aged 62, he would not receive this benefit where a woman of the same age would have done, and . .
CitedFantask and others v Industriministeriet ECJ 2-Dec-1997
ECJ Directive 69/335/EEC – Registration charges on companies – Procedural time-limits under national law. . .
CitedMcdermott and Cotter v Minister For Social Welfare and Attorney-General ECJ 24-Mar-1987
Europa Where council directive 79/7 has not been implemented, article 4(1) of the directive, which prohibits all discrimination on grounds of sex in matters of social security, could be relied on as from 23 . .
CitedSteenhorst-Neerings v Bestuur van de Bedrijfsvereniging voor Detailhandel, Ambachten en Huisvrouwen ECJ 27-Oct-1993
Europa Community law does not preclude the application of a national rule of law according to which benefits for incapacity for work are payable no more than one year before the date of claim, in the case where . .
CitedElsie Rita Johnson v Chief Adjudication Officer ECJ 6-Dec-1994
Europa Social policy – Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security – Directive 79/7 – Article 4(1) – Direct effect – National legislation limiting the period prior to the bringing of a claim . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, European

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237499

Miah v The Secretary of State for Social Security: CA 3 May 2002

The claimant appealed a discontinuance of his Disability Living Allowance. He had been re-assessed after a request for a review of his allowance on being diagnosed as a diabetic. On re-assessment, the doctor used assessment standards based upon diabetics with visual impairment, but the original allowance had been for his lack of mobility. Having failed the visual impairment test, his Allowance was stopped.
Held: The request for a review did trigger the risk of a full re-assessment. However the form had not been completed with his mobility in mind. It was not possible for the tribunal properly to make assumptions about the claimant’s condition. There was no evidence to say that he did not need the help he had always needed. The Commissioner had assumed he could answer a question which the doctor was not asked. Appeal allowed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 592

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions & Benefits Act 1992 73(1), Social Security Administration Act 1992 30(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.170273

Vroege v NCIV Instituut voor Volkshuisvesting B V: ECJ 28 Sep 1994

Europa The right to join an occupational pension scheme, the rules of which were not laid down directly by law but were the result of negotiation between both sides of the industry concerned and all that the public authorities did was, at the request of such employers’ and trade union organizations as were considered to be representative, to declare the scheme compulsory for the whole of the industry concerned, is covered by the concept of pay within the meaning of Article 119 of the Treaty with the result that it is subject to the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex laid down by that article. It follows that an occupational pension scheme which by excluding married women from membership operates discrimination directly based on sex contravenes Article 119 of the Treaty. Where the exclusion concerns part-time workers, that provision is contravened only if the exclusion affects a greater number of women than men unless the employer shows that it may be explained by objectively justified factors unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex.
The limitation of the effects in time of the judgment of 17 May 1990 in Case C-262/88 Barber concerns only those kinds of discrimination which employers and pension schemes could reasonably have considered to be permissible owing to the transitional derogations for which Community law provided and which were capable of being applied to occupational pensions. This does not cover discrimination in relation to membership of occupational pension schemes held to be unlawful under Article 119 of the Treaty in the judgment of 13 May 1986 in Case 170/84 Bilka which itself contained no temporal limitation of its effects. In the absence of such a limitation, whose later introduction is in any event excluded, the direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty can be relied upon in order retroactively to claim equal treatment in relation to the right to join an occupational pension scheme and this may be done as from 8 April 1976, the date of the judgment in Case 43/75 Defrenne in which the Court held for the first time that Article 119 has direct effect.
The Protocol on Article 119 of the Treaty, annexed to the Treaty on European Union, concerns all benefits paid by an occupational social security scheme but not the right to join such a scheme. The question of membership is thus governed by the judgment of 13 May 1986 in Case 170/84 Bilka according to which an undertaking which, without objective justification unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex, accords different treatment to men and women by excluding a category of employees from a company pension scheme infringes Article 119 of the Treaty.

Citations:

C-57/93, [1994] ECR I-4541

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

CitedPowerhouse Retail Ltd and others v Burroughs and others; Preston and others v Wolverhampton Healthcare NHS Trust and others (No 3) HL 8-Mar-2006
The appellants said they had been had been discriminated against on the grounds of their sex by the TUPE Regulations. Their discrimination cases had been dismissed as out of time.
Held: The employees’ appeals were dismissed: ‘A statute cannot . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Employment, Benefits

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.161081

K and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 8 Nov 2018

This case is about modern slavery. Specifically, it is about the money paid by the state to certain potential victims of human trafficking[1]. On 1 March 2018 the weekly cash amount payable to such people was cut by 42% from pounds 65 to pounds 37.75. The claimants say that this cut is unlawful. They seek that the decision that brought about the cut be quashed and that they be recompensed at the weekly rate of pounds 27.25 from 1 March 2018 until repayment.

Judges:

Mostyn J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 2951 (Admin), [2018] WLR(D) 692

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.630564