Category: Benefits

Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Frid: HL 13 May 2004

The company went into insolvent liquidation. The secretary of state was to make payments to employees and there were other state preferential creditors. At the same time a refund of VAT was due from the Commissioners of customs and Excise.
Held: The sums paid out and preferential debts could be set off against the VAT refund. It was not necessary that the debt should have been due and payable before the insolvency date. It is sufficient that there should have been an obligation arising out of the terms of a contract or statute by which a debt sounding in money would become payable upon the occurrence of some future event or events. The appeal was allowed.

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2004] UKHL 24, Times 14-May-2004, [2004] 2 AC 506, [2004] BPIR 841, [2004] 2 BCLC 1, [2004] 2 WLR 1279, [2004] 2 All ER 1042

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Insolvency Rules 1986 4.90

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Stein v Blake HL 18-May-1995
Where A and B each have claims against each other and A is insolvent, the common amount is set off, and the net difference remains as a debt due.
Hoffmann L said: ‘It is a matter of common occurrence for an individual to become insolvent while . .
Cited – In re Charge Card Services Ltd ChD 1987
The court discussed the historic availability of set-off in an insolvency: ‘By the turn of the [20th] century, therefore, the authorities showed that debts whose existence and amount were alike contingent at the date of the receiving order, and . .
Cited – In re Fenton CA 1931
A surety under a pre-insolvency guarantee, had not actually paid, and could not pay, being bankrupt with his assets vested in the trustee. The creditor was still owed the money and entitled to prove in the liquidation.
Held: One could not have . .
Incorrect – In re A Debtor (No 66 of 1955), Ex parte The Debtor v Trustee of Waite (A Bankrupt) CA 2-Jan-1956
Waite owed the debtor andpound;101 for goods sold and delivered. He was bankrupted, having previously guaranteed the debtor’s overdraft and deposited the deeds of his property as security. Waite’s trustee paid the bank andpound;133 out of the . .
Cited – In re A Debtor (No 66 of 1955), Ex parte The Debtor v Trustee of Waite (A Bankrupt) ChD 1956
Waite owed money and guaranteed a debt before being made bankrupt. Waite and his trustee were not for this purpose the same person. Waite had held his assets for his own benefit. The trustee paid the debt.
Held: The trustee held the assets . .
Cited – In re Moseley-Green Coal and Coke Co Ltd, Ex parte Barrett 1865
Mr Barrett owed the company money on his partly-paid shares for which calls were made after it went into insolvent liquidation. He had also guaranteed the company’s liability for the purchase price of a coal mine, for which the vendor held security . .
Cited – Mann and others v Secretary of State for Employment HL 8-Jul-1999
When acting effectively as a guarantor of a company’s obligations to its employees upon insolvency in paying unpaid wages, the Secretary of State for Employment was entitled to set off against those payments, payments made by way of compensation by . .
Cited – In re D H Curtis (Builders) Ltd ChD 1978
Debts were, on the one side, the liability of the company to the Inland Revenue and the Department of Health and Social Security for PAYE and National Insurance contribution respectively and, on the other, the liability of HM Customs and Excise to . .
Cited – Swain v The Law Society HL 1983
The Solicitors’ Practice Rules had the force of a statute, being rules made by the Council of the Law Society with parliamentary sanction for the protection of that section of the public who might be in need of legal advice, assistance or oversight. . .
Cited – Booth v Hutchinson 1872
The additional words in the new Act relating to set-off ‘were intended to give a more extended right of set-off than previously existed’ . .
Cited – Peat v Jones and Co 1881
Sir George Jessel MR said: ‘Now the enactment as to ‘mutual credits’ is a very old one, first appearing in 5 Geo 2, c 30, but the whole tendency of the subsequent legislation, as of the legislation respecting proveable debts, has been to extend the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wilkinson, Regina (on the Application Of) v Inland Revenue HL 5-May-2005
The claimant said that the widows’ bereavement tax allowance available to a wife surviving her husband should be available to a man also if it was not to be discriminatory.
Held: Similar claims had been taken before the Human Rights Act to the . .
Cited – McCartney 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 . .
Cited – In re Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander Ltd SC 19-Oct-2011
The bank had been put into administrative receivership, and the court was now asked as to how distributions were to be made, and in particular as to the application of the equitable rule in Cherry v Boultbee in the rule against double proof as it . .
Cited – In re SSSL Realisations (2002) Ltd and Another; Squires and others v AIG Europe (UK) Ltd and Another CA 18-Jan-2006
A creditor claiming an equity in a debt but who himself owed money to the debtor, could not pursue his claim without first contributing the sum due. A person could not take an aliquot share out of a fund without first contributing what he owed to . .
Cited – In 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: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196759

Regina, ex parte O v The London Borough of Haringey, The Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 4 May 2004

The court considered the duties of local authorities to support infirm asylum seekers with children.
Held: The authority had an obligation to support the adult, but the responsibility for the children fell on the National Asylum Support Service.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rix, LCJ, Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 535, Times 27-May-2004, [2004] 2 FNR 476

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 21, Immigration and Asylum Act 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service HL 17-Oct-2002
The applicant sought assistance from the local authority. He suffered from spinal myeloma, was destitute and an asylum seeker.
Held: Although the Act had withdrawn the obligation to provide assistance for many asylum seekers, those who were . .

Cited by:

Cited – City of Westminster v Boraliu CA 2-Nov-2007
The Council had taken leases of properties from a Housing Association to provide accomodation to the homeless, satisfying its statutory duties. The tenant B was said to be a non-secure tenant, but the tenancy agreement did not reflect the terms of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Benefits, Children

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196626

Regina (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 existing right to support which had been terminated.

Judges:

Sir Andrew Morritt VC, Buxton LJ, Laws LJ

Citations:

Times 13-Nov-2003, (2003) 34 HLR 423

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 102(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – 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 . .

Cited by:

Endorsed – Secretary of State for the Home Department, Regina (on the Application of) v Chief Asylum Support Adjudicator and Another Admn 30-Nov-2006
The claimant had sought support which had been refused by the Home Secretary on the basis that he was no longer an asylum seeker. The claimant sought judicial review of the refusal of his appeal by the Chief Asylum Support adjudicator. The Home . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Benefits

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.188680

Collins 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 of the European Union.

Citations:

C-138/02, Times 30-Mar-2004, [2004] EUECJ C-138/02, [2004] All ER (EC) 1005, [2004] 2 CMLR 8, [2004] 3 WLR 1236, [2004] ECR I-2703, [2005] ICR 37, [2004] CEC 436, [2005] QB 145

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Treaty 48

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Patmalniece v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 16-Mar-2011
The claimant challenged as incompatible with EU law, the Regulations which restricted the entitlement to state pension credit to those entitled to reside in the UK.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority). The conditions imposed by the Regulations . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195048

Regina (Limbuela) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 4 Feb 2004

The claimant had sought asylum on the day after arrival, and had therefore been refused any assistance beyond the provision of a list of charities who might assist. His lawyers were unable to secure either shelter or maintenance, and he had been left to sleep rough outside a police station.
Held: The treatment amounted to inhuman or degrading treatment under the Convention. The threshold was high. The court had to consider just what ‘treatment’ had been given. Here the claimant was left without shelter or money, and he already had health problems, and might be expected to suffer psychiatric problems if the treatment continued. The only alternative left to him was crime or begging.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

Times 09-Feb-2004, [2004] EWHC 219 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8, Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 55

Citing:

Cited – Regina (on the Application of Q and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 18-Mar-2003
The Home Secretary appealed a ruling that his implementation of section 55 was unlawful, having been said to be incompatible with human rights law.
Held: The way in which the section had been operated, by denying consideration and all benefits . .
Cited – Regina (T) v the Secretary of State for the Home Department; similar CA 23-Sep-2003
The claimant asylum seeker had been refused benefits having failed to declare his application on entry. The Secretary now appealed a finding that the decision was flawed. Was the treatment of the applicant inhuman or degrading?
Held: No simple . .
Cited – Pretty v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Apr-2002
Right to Life Did Not include Right to Death
The applicant was paralysed and suffered a degenerative condition. She wanted her husband to be allowed to assist her suicide by accompanying her to Switzerland. English law would not excuse such behaviour. She argued that the right to die is not . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – The Secretary of State for the Home Department v Limbuela, Tesema, Adam CA 21-May-2004
The appellant brought in policies which denied to asylum claimants who had failed to declare their status immediately upon entry, any shelter or support or the right to work. They were to be left to starve on the streets if they so wished. He . .
At first instance – Adam, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Limbuela v Same; Tesema v Same HL 3-Nov-2005
The applicants had each entered the UK with a view to seeking asylum, but having failed to seek asylum immediately, they had been refused any assistance, were not allowed to work and so had been left destitute. Each had claimed asylum on the day . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Benefits, Immigration

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.193420

Secretary of State for Defence v President of the Pension Appeal Tribunals (England and Wales): QBD 4 Feb 2004

The secretary appealed a decision of the Pensions Appeal Tribunal to set aside a decision of the Pensions Tribunal. The applicant had been awarded a service pension.
Held: The PAT had no general power to set aside a decision of the tribunal for an irregularity. The rules provided for a right of appeal to the High Court, and therefore no great hardship resulted. The PAT should have remitted the case for directions.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Newman

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 141 (Admin), Times 27-Feb-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Pensions Appeal Tribunals Act 1943

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Armed Forces, Benefits

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.192631

Aber Roof Truss Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 29 Sep 2010

Statutory Sick Pay – whether an employee unfit to work due to incapacity or illness – employer disputed employee’s entitlement to SSP due to frequent sports injuries – whether SSP payable – yes

Citations:

[2010] UKFTT 454 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.426561

Nina Kristiansen v Rijksdienst voor Arbeidsvoorziening (Judgment): ECJ 4 Dec 2003

ECJ Social security – National system of unemployment benefits laying down a rule against overlapping of benefits as regards certain income – Unemployment benefits for former members of the temporary staff of the European Communities – Freedom of movement for workers – National scheme of unemployment insurance – Classification of post-graduate occupation – Occupation of trainee fellowship student – Different classification in other Member States of the EEA – Discrimination.

Citations:

C-92/02, [2003] EUECJ C-92/02

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.190074

Wright-Turner v Department for Social Development: CANI 11 Jan 2002

Appeal from rejection of claim for invalid care allowance

Citations:

[2002] NICA 2

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Deane CA 23-Jun-2010
Care Allowance withheld for full time student
The claimant cared for her daughter but then commenced a university degree course. Being in full time education, her entitlement to Invalid Care Allowance was withheld. The Secretary of State appealed against a re-instatement of the benefit.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189652

Zar Begum v Social Security Commissioners and Another: Admn 6 Nov 2003

The applicant sought judicial review of the respondent’s refusal of income support. She had entered the UK on the basis of an undertaking given that she would be supported without recourse to public funds. The legislation provided no standard form for such an undertaking, but the absence of such an undertaking was not fatal to prevent excusing payment of benefits.

Judges:

Sir Christopher Bellamy QC

Citations:

Times 04-Dec-2003, Gazette 02-Jan-2004, [2003] EWHC 3380 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Support (General Regulations) 1987 21(3)(I

Immigration, Benefits

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188609

Commission v Netherlands: ECJ 6 Nov 2003

ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Social security – Articles 69 and 71 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Unemployment benefit – Frontier workers – Retention of benefit entitlement when seeking employment in another Member State

Judges:

A La Pergola

Citations:

C-311/01, [2003] EUECJ C-311/01

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 69 71

European, Benefits

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187777

Regina on the Application of Isle of Anglesey County Council v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 30 Oct 2003

The claimant council sought re-imbursement from the Secretary of the excess housing benefit payments it had made to claimants. The system expected the Council to have made referrals of high rents to rent officers. The respondent had decided that it had been a failure to make such referrals had led to the overpayments, and that the Council had received benefit. The Council replied that it had received nothing which it had not paid on, and that a failure to make repayment, even of a part of the overpayment, would cause it hardship.
Held: The decision taken by the Secretary of State was lawful, and nor was there any other adequate reason to quash the decision to recover the sum demanded.

Judges:

The Hon Mr Justice Lindsay

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 2518 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions & Benefits Act 1992 123(1)(d) 123(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council, ex parte Hook CA 1976
The applicant applied to have quashed the decision of the local council to exclude him from trading in the market and to revoke his right to have a stall.
Held: He succeeded on the grounds that the decision had been taken in breach of the . .
Cited – Regina v Brent London Boriugh Council, ex parte Assegai 1987
A committee of the Borough resolved to ban Mr Assegai, who had been involved in a fracas and had made offensive remarks to two Councillors, from visiting any of the Borough’s properties. The resolution also purported to remove him from his . .
Cited – Regina (on the application of Waite) v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council CA 2002
As to the distribution of benefits, ‘ . . the distribution of State benefit lies peculiarly within the constitutional responsibility of elected Government’. . .
Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its . .
Cited – Regina v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Commissioners of Customs and Excise, ex parte National Farmers’ Union and others ECJ 5-May-1998
Land from which nitrates were leeching off into rivers causing pollution, had to be designated as environmentally vulnerable land, if agricultural activities were a substantial even if only partially cause of the pollution. ‘As regards . . . the . .
Cited – Regina (Annette Carson) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 22-May-2002
The claimant received a UK state pension. She lived in South Africa, and challenged the exclusion of foreign resident pensioners from the annual uprating of pension benefits. She asserted that the state pension, or its uprating, were pecuniary . .

Cited by:

Cited – London Borough of Lambeth, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 20-Apr-2005
The authority had received too much by way of housing benefit subsidy in 1991 and 1992, having failed to refer rents to rent officers. It now challenged the decision of the respondent to recover the overpayment by deductions from future payments. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Benefits

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187276

Shire v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 13 Oct 2003

The claimant, a Somali woman, had arrived at Gatwick Airport from Yemen at 10.30 pm on 29 August 1999 and not claimed asylum until 31 August (the intervening day being a bank holiday). Her reason for not claiming at Gatwick was that she was accompanied by an agent who unsurprisingly was concerned that nothing be done which might occasion his arrest for facilitation. The claimant had lodged her appeal with the court of appeal but then sought to change the grounds upon which the appeal was based. The claimant did not forewarn the court.
Held: ‘In a situation of that nature it is highly desirable that those who act on behalf of the appellant should write to the court and to the other party indicating the proposed nature of the changed case which is to be advanced, seeking the directions of the court as to whether the matter should be dealt with at the beginning of the hearing of the appeal or by directions being given by the court prior to the hearing of the appeal. ‘ In this case, the question was what was meant by the obligation on an asylum applicant to make a claim ‘on his arrival’. Here she acted under the direction of an agent who arranged her immigration, and must be assumed to be under that agent’s direction. The claim had not been made on her arrival.

Judges:

The Lord Chief Justice Of England And Wales, (The Lord Woolf Of Barnes) Lord Justice Chadwick And Lord Justice Buxton

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1465, Times 30-Oct-2003

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Kola and Another v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 28-Nov-2007
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Immigration

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187113

Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, Regina (on the Application of) v Perks and Another: Admn 8 Jul 2003

A reduction in council tax was not to be allowed for a disability for rooms unless the reason for occupying the room was associated with the disability.

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1749 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Valuation and Community Charge Tribunal Regulations 1989

Rating, Benefits

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.185645

Szoma v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 30 Jul 2003

The applicant, a foreign national had been given temporary admission to the UK. He received income support. But this ceased after his asylum application was rejected, and he remained resident.
Held: The legislation now made specific reference to the concept of lawful presence, and required this before an entitlement to benefits arose. The case of Bugdaycay had set that concept out, and this had been confirmed in Kaya’s case, and now again by this court.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill Mr Justice Maurice Kay Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1131, Times 22-Aug-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 115(1) 115(3), Social Security (Immigration and Asylum) Consequential Amendments Regulations 2000 (2000 No 636)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay HL 19-Feb-1986
Three applicants had lied on entry to secure admission, stayed for a considerable time, and had been treated as illegal immigrants under section 33(1). The fourth’s claim that upon being returned he would been killed, had been rejected without . .
Confirmed – Murat Kaya v Haringey London Borough Council and Another CA 14-Jun-2001
The grant of temporary admission to the UK pending an decision on his asylum status, did not create a full ‘lawful presence’ in the UK. A person seeking to qualify for housing assistance had to be lawfully present within the UK, and temporary . .
Appeal from – Szoma v Southwark London Borough Council Admn 17-Feb-2003
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Szoma v Secretary of State for the Department of Work and Pensions HL 28-Jul-2005
The applicant had claimed asylum on entry and was temporarily admitted. Though his claim for asylum was later refused, those admitted in this way were granted indefinite leave to remain. He had claimed and received benefits at first, but then these . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Immigration

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185241

Carson and Reynolds v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 17 Jun 2003

The claimant Reynolds challenged the differential treatment by age of jobseeker’s allowance. Carson complained that as a foreign resident pensioner, her benefits had not been uprated. The questions in each case were whether the benefit affected a ‘possession’ within the Convention or the discrimination was arbitrary so as to breach the applicants human rights.
Held: The meaning of possessions within the Convention was autonomous. In the field of social security the Strasbourg court has drawn a line between contributory and non-contributory benefits. The decision to exclude foreign residents from uprating of benefits was objectively justified without regard to cost. Equally there was an objective justification for the differentiation between under and over 25s in the payment of benefits, at least as regards jobseekers allowance.

Judges:

Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Simon Brown

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 797, Times 28-Jun-2003, [2003] 3 All ER 577

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights , Jobseekers Allowance Regulations 1996 79, Jobseekers Act 1995 4(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (Annette Carson) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 22-May-2002
The claimant received a UK state pension. She lived in South Africa, and challenged the exclusion of foreign resident pensioners from the annual uprating of pension benefits. She asserted that the state pension, or its uprating, were pecuniary . .
Appeal from – Reynolds, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 7-Mar-2002
. .
Cited – Marckx v Belgium ECHR 13-Jun-1979
Recognition of illegitimate children
The complaint related to the manner in which parents were required to adopt their own illegitimate child in order to increase his rights. Under Belgian law, no legal bond between an unmarried mother and her child results from the mere fact of birth. . .
Cited – Willis v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jun-2002
Discrimination in the payment of ‘widows payment’ and widowed mother’s allowance infringed the rights conferred by article 14 read with article 1 of Protocol 1 but no finding was made about the widow’s pension. The risk of the applicant being . .
Cited – Relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium (Belgian Linguistics) No 2 ECHR 9-Feb-1967
The applicants, parents of more than 800 Francophone children, living in certain (mostly Dutch-speaking) parts of Belgium, complained that their children were denied access to an education in French.
Held: In establishing a system or regime to . .
Cited – E (A Minor) v Dorset County Council CA 1995
It is generally unwise to give summary judgment in cases where the relevant law is uncertain or in a state of development: ‘This must mean that where the legal viability of a cause of action is unclear (perhaps because the law is in a state of . .
Cited – Abdulaziz etc v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-May-1985
Three women, all lawfully settled in the UK, had married third-country nationals but, at first, the Secretary of State had refused permission for their husbands to remain with them, or join them, in the UK.
Held: The refusals of permission had . .
Cited – Vaughan v United Kingdom ECHR 1987
Article 8 does not impose any positive obligation to provide financial assistance to support a person’s family life. . .
Cited – Gaygusuz v Austria ECHR 16-Sep-1996
The applicant was a Turkish national resident in Austria. While working there he had paid unemployment insurance contributions. At a stage when he was unemployed he applied for an advance on his pension in the form of emergency assistance. That was . .
Cited – Carlin v United Kingdom ECHR 1-Dec-1997
The Commission dismissed as manifestly unfounded a complaint that the suspension of Industrial Injuries Disability Benefit during a person’s imprisonment involved any violation of Article 1P. It reiterated that ‘it is still necessary, in order for . .
Cited – Botta v Italy ECHR 24-Feb-1998
The claimant, who was disabled, said that his Article 8 rights were infringed because, in breach of Italian law, there were no facilities to enable him to get to the sea when he went on holiday.
Held: ‘Private life . . includes a person’s . .
Cited – Szrabjer and Clarke v United Kingdom ECHR 17-Jun-1998
The applicants were denied the earnings-related element of their pensions while they were in prison, pursuant to s.113(1)(d) of the 1992 Act which I have set out. They claimed violations both of Article 1P, and of Article 14 read with Article 1P. . .
Cited – Petrovic v Austria ECHR 27-Mar-1998
The applicant was refused a grant of parental leave allowance in 1989. At that time parental leave allowance was available only to mothers. The applicant complained that this violated article 14 taken together with article 8.
Held: The . .
Cited – Chapman v United Kingdom; similar ECHR 18-Jan-2001
The question arose as to the refusal of planning permission and the service of an enforcement notice against Mrs Chapman who wished to place her caravan on a plot of land in the Green Belt. The refusal of planning permission and the enforcement . .
Cited – Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .
Cited – Michalak v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 6-Mar-2002
The appellant had occupied for a long time a room in a house let by the authority. After the death of the tenant, the appellant sought, but was refused, a statutory tenancy. He claimed to be a member of the tenant’s family, and that the list of . .
Cited – Sporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden ECHR 18-Dec-1984
Balance of Interests in peaceful enjoyment claim
An interference with the peaceful enjoyment of possessions must strike a fair balance between the demands of the general interests of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual’s fundamental rights. This balance is . .
Cited – James and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Feb-1986
The claimants challenged the 1967 Act, saying that it deprived them of their property rights when lessees were given the power to purchase the freehold reversion.
Held: Article 1 (P1-1) in substance guarantees the right of property. Allowing a . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
Cited – Michalak v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 6-Mar-2002
The appellant had occupied for a long time a room in a house let by the authority. After the death of the tenant, the appellant sought, but was refused, a statutory tenancy. He claimed to be a member of the tenant’s family, and that the list of . .
Cited – Quintavalle, Regina (on the Application of) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority CA 16-May-2003
A licence was sought so that a couple could have a child who would be tissue typed to establish his suitability to provide an umbilical cord after his birth to help treat his future brother. A licence had been granted subject to conditions, and the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark CA 16-Oct-2003
The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the . .
Cited – Bishop of Roman Catholic Diocese of Port Louis and Others v Suttyhudeo Tengur and Others PC 3-Feb-2004
PC (Mauritius) A father challenged the constitutionality of a system where 50% of places in Catholic run secondary schools were allocated to Catholic childen, and fifty per cent according to merit. He feared this . .
Cited – Douglas v North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council CA 19-Dec-2003
The applicant had sought a student loan to support his studies as a mature student. It was refused because he would be over 55 at the date of the commencement of the course. He claimed this was discriminatory.
Held: The Convention required the . .
Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza HL 21-Jun-2004
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession
The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law . .
Cited – Evans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd and others CA 25-Jun-2004
The applicant challenged the decision of the court that the sperm donor who had fertilised her eggs to create embryos stored by the respondent IVF clinic, could withdraw his consent to their continued storage or use.
Held: The judge worked . .
Cited – S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
Cited – Khan v Royal Air Force Summary Appeal Court Admn 7-Oct-2004
The defendant claimed that he had gone absent without leave from the RAF as a conscientous objector.
Held: The defendant had not demonstrated by complaint to the RAF that he did object to service in Iraq. In some circumstances where there was . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v Hindawi and Headley CA 13-Oct-2004
The applicant was a foreign national serving a long-term prison sentence. He complained that UK nationals would have had their case referred to the parole board before his.
Held: The right to be referred to the parole board was a statutory . .
Approved – A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Dec-2004
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they . .
Appeal from – Carson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Reynolds v Same HL 26-May-2005
One claimant said that as a foreign resident pensioner, she had been excluded from the annual uprating of state retirement pension, and that this was an infringement of her human rights. Another complained at the lower levels of job-seeker’s . .
At Court of Appeal – Carson and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 4-Nov-2008
(Grand Chamber) Pensioners who had moved abroad complained that they had been excluded from the index-linked uprating of pensions given to pensioners living in England.
Held: This was not an infringement of their human rights. Differences in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Human Rights, Benefits

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184064

Gjini, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Islington: CA 15 Apr 2003

The appellant challenged the respondent’s decision to reduce the amount paid to her by way of asylum support benefit by the amount of child benefit she received.
Held: The applicant had failed to make proper disclosure to the court of the facts underlying her case. Since the case had begun, the Coucil had reviewed its policies and uprated the benefits payable. The evidence placed before the court as to the various benefits rates and calculations was weak. It was not possible to say that the method of calculation used by the Council was irrational or inaccurate, and the appeal was dismissed.

Judges:

The Vice-Chancellor, Lord Justice Clarke and Lord Justice Kay

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 558

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

The Asylum Support (Interim Provisions) Regulations 1999 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Lloyd’s of London 1993
There is a duty to be performed by those who represent applicants for judicial review to make all appropriate enquiries and to disclose to the court all facts material to the application. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Immigration, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180738

Williams v Devon County Council: CA 18 Mar 2003

The claimant had recovered damages, but was ordered to pay costs since she had recovered less than was paid in. She appealed.
Held: There were anomalies in the system with regard to the recoverable social security benefits. The sums recoverable were not reduced in line with any reduction for contributory negligence, benefits could be recovered for time periods for which no award was made, and the benefits could be set off against a wider range of sums. The calculation upon which the costs decision must therefore be made to reflect no more than the amount appropriate for the head of damages against which the benefits could be offset. There remained difficulties which the court should deal with within its discretion.

Citations:

Times 25-Mar-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 365

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 36.20, Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Geoffrey Chatwin v Janice Lowther CA 21-May-2003
The case concerned the meaning of the phrase ‘compensation for earnings lost’ as it applied to self employed persons.
Held: The fact that a person’s accounts described fees as turnover, did not prevent them being still earnings within the Act. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Benefits, Damages

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180364

Regina (on the Application of Q and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 18 Mar 2003

The Home Secretary appealed a ruling that his implementation of section 55 was unlawful, having been said to be incompatible with human rights law.
Held: The way in which the section had been operated, by denying consideration and all benefits to any asylum applicant who did not claim asylum immediately upon entry, was unfair. There were several possible reasons which might lead to a claim not being made as soon as reasonably practical. These reasons would be disregarded under the appellant’s system. The burden of establishing the promptness of the application lay on the asylum seeker. A decision not to provide support could not become unlawful until it became clear that charitable aid would not be forthcoming, and the applicant would be unable to fend for himself. The threshold for establishing inhuman or degrading treatment by the failure to provide support was a high one. The system failed in not explaining properly to the applicant the nature and purpose of the interview. The case workers were not properly directed as to the tests to apply. Regard had to be given to the applicant’s state of mind, and the reasons for not applying immediately should be investigated. The interviewer and decision maker needed to be the same person. The applicants had been treated unfairly, and the Secretary of State’s appeal was dismissed.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR said: ‘The common law of judicial review in England and Wales has not stood still in recent years. Starting from the received checklist of justiciable errors set out by Lord Diplock in the CCSU case [1985] AC 374, the courts (as Lord Diplock himself anticipated they would) have developed an issue-sensitive scale of intervention to enable them to perform their constitutional function in an increasingly complex polity. They continue to abstain from merits review – in effect, retaking the decision on the facts – but in appropriate classes of case they will today look very closely at the process by which facts have been ascertained and at the logic of the inferences drawn from them.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Sedley Lord Justice Clarke Lord Phillips Mr

Citations:

Times 19-Mar-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 364, Gazette 29-May-2003, [2003] 2 All ER 905, [2003] HRLR 21, [2004] QB 36, [2003] UKHRR 607, [2003] 3 WLR 365, (2003) 6 CCL Rep 136, (2003) 6 CCL Rep 136, [2003] ACD 46

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 55, European Convention on Human Rights 3 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (Q) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Regina (D) v Same; Regina (J) v Same etc Admn 19-Feb-2003
The several applicants challenged the implementation of the section, which required an asylum seeker to make his application at the very first opportunity on arriving in the UK, and denied all benefit and support to those who did not do so. A form . .
Cited – Rex v Inhabitants of Eastbourne 1803
As to there being no obligation for maintaining poor foreigners before the statutes ascertaining the different methods of acquiring settlements, the law of humanity, which is anterior to all positive laws, obliges us to afford them relief, to save . .
Cited – Pretty v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Apr-2002
Right to Life Did Not include Right to Death
The applicant was paralysed and suffered a degenerative condition. She wanted her husband to be allowed to assist her suicide by accompanying her to Switzerland. English law would not excuse such behaviour. She argued that the right to die is not . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Regina (Q) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Regina (D) v Same; Regina (J) v Same etc Admn 19-Feb-2003
The several applicants challenged the implementation of the section, which required an asylum seeker to make his application at the very first opportunity on arriving in the UK, and denied all benefit and support to those who did not do so. A form . .
Cited – K v London Borough of Lambeth CA 31-Jul-2003
The claimant appealed against refusal of judicial review. She had entered the UK, and applied for asylum. She was then found to have contracted a marriage of convenience, and thus become ineligible for support. She appealed and now sought housing . .
Cited – Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark CA 16-Oct-2003
The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the . .
Cited – Regina (Limbuela) v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 4-Feb-2004
The claimant had sought asylum on the day after arrival, and had therefore been refused any assistance beyond the provision of a list of charities who might assist. His lawyers were unable to secure either shelter or maintenance, and he had been . .
Cited – Adam, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Limbuela v Same; Tesema v Same HL 3-Nov-2005
The applicants had each entered the UK with a view to seeking asylum, but having failed to seek asylum immediately, they had been refused any assistance, were not allowed to work and so had been left destitute. Each had claimed asylum on the day . .
Cited – Kennedy v The Charity Commission SC 26-Mar-2014
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights, Benefits

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179864

Cooke v Secretary of State for Social Security: CA 25 Apr 2001

Although production of a new medical report, or of a new medical opinion, could evidence a relevant change of circumstances, to support the claim that the threshold had been reached so as to allow a review of a decision to grant benefits, it did not in itself suffice to constitute such a change, without which the jurisdiction to review did not exist. Specialist tribunals, chaired as they usually are by a lawyer, have an appropriate balance of experience and expertise amongst their members. The court set out the principles to be applied on hearing applications for second tier appeals from specialist tribunals. Hale LJ urged appropriate caution in giving permission to appeal from the Social Security Commissioners, because of their particular expertise in a highly specialised area of the law, where it was ‘quite probable that . . the Social Security Commissioner will have got it right’.
The court set out the principles to be applied on hearing applications for second tier appeals from specialist tribunals.

Judges:

Hale LJ, Clarke LJ and Butterfield J

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 734, [2002] 3 All ER 279

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings Ltd v Director General of Fair Trading CA 8-May-2002
The applicant sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Competition Commission Appeals Tribunal.
Held: Since the decision of the tribunal did not involve questions of law, it fell exactly within the Cooke case, and the court should be . .
Cited – Wood v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 31-Jan-2003
The appellant suffered cerebral palsy. Following a review, he was awarded mobility allowance, and then later the mobility component of Disability Living Allowance for life. He applied for the care element also. The respondent refused the care . .
Cited – Smith v Smith and Another CA 19-Oct-2004
The father challenged a ruling that in calculating his liability to pay child support he was not entitled first to deduct, as a self-employed person, all the allowances he might claim against income tax by way of capital allowances.
Held: The . .
Cited – Gillies v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 26-Jan-2006
The claimant said that the medical member of the tribunal which had heard his disability claim was biased. The doctor was on a temporary contract and also worked for an agency which contracted directly the Benfits Agency. The court of session had . .
Cited – Brewer, Regina (on the Application of) v Supreme Court Costs Office Admn 27-Jul-2006
The defendant had been acquitted. Orders had been made both for payment of his legal costs, and also for re-imbursement of his own costs. The defendant was accused of serious fraud, and had engaged an American attorney to assist him before . .
Cited – HM Revenue and Customs v Weight Watchers (UK) Ltd ChD 21-Jan-2008
The court was asked whether the weight-watchers program which included attendance at a course and a supply of supporting materials was one single standard-rated supply or separate supplies of zero-rated printed materials and standard-rated support . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v AH (Sudan) and others HL 14-Nov-2007
The three respondents had fled persecution in Darfur. They sought asylum which was refused, and they now appealed. It was argued that whilst they had a well founded fear of persecution in Dhafur, that would not apply if they returned to Khartoum. . .
Cited – Wiles v Social Security Commissioner and Another CA 16-Mar-2010
The court considered one of the last applications for permission to seek judicial review of a Social Security Commissioner’s determination before the transfer of the Commissioner’s jurisdiction to the Upper Tribunal. Mr Eadie, for the Commissioner, . .
Cited – Cart v The Upper Tribunal SC 21-Jun-2011
Limitations to Judicial Reviw of Upper Tribunal
Three claimants sought to challenge decisions of various Upper Tribunals by way of judicial review. In each case the request for judicial review had been first refused on the basis that having been explicitly designated as higher courts, the proper . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Litigation Practice

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179836

Hinchy v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 20 Feb 2003

The appellant challenged an order requiring her to repay benefits. She had ceased to become entitled to disability allowance when it expired without renewal, and so also lost the right to a severe disability premium. She did not inform the second office of the change in her circumstances.
Held: There was a system whereby the two offices should have kept each other informed of such changes. There was no finding that she had acted dishonestly. She said she could not fail to disclose a material fact to the respondent which was already known to him. It was reasonable for her to believe that the information in one department would be made known to the other, and therefore there was no need for her to inform the second, and there had been no non-disclosure.

Judges:

Lord Jusice Aldous Lord Justice Carnwath Sir Denis Henry

Citations:

Times 24-Feb-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 138, Gazette 01-May-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Administration Act 1992 71

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Works and Pensions v Mohammed Miah CA 25-Jul-2003
The claimant sought benefits. He had a large family which could only be housed in two adjacent houses. His claim for benefit was turned down on the basis that the second house was not regarded as his home, and therefore stood as capital, resulting . .
Appeal from – Hinchy v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 3-Mar-2005
The applicant had been dependent upon income support, and had then come to receive Disability Living Allowance (DLA). She therefore received additional income support, but the office did not adjust that benefit down when her DLA stopped. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179578

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Whalley: CA 14 Feb 2003

The applicant sought to appeal the decision of the Social Security Commissioner as to the date from which he suffered from a prescribed industrial disease.
Held: Such a decision under the section was final and was not open to appeal. A later Commissioner could not award any benefit for a time when it had already been decided that he did not suffer the disease, and nor was the claimant entitled to reduced benefit unless he had made a claim for disability allowance.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mummery Lord Justice Dyson Lord Justice Schiemann

Citations:

Times 03-Mar-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 166

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Benefits Act 1992 108

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179328

Gregory Ramsden v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 31 Jan 2003

The claimant appealed against refusal of an award of the care component of Disability Living Allowance.
Held: It was not clear that the tribunal had properly applied the test laid down in Cockburn and the matter was remitted to be reheard before a different tribunal.

Judges:

Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Mance, Mr Justice Sullivan

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 32

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security (Contributions Benefits) Act 1992 72(1)(a)(i)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v National Insurance Commissioner, Ex parte Secretary of State for Social Services; In re Packer CA 1981
Mrs Packer, a lady of eighty-three, claimed an attendance allowance under the Act of 1975 in respect of the cooking of her meals which she could not do herself. The Commissioner thought that eating was a bodily function and that cooking was so . .
Cited – Cockburn v Chief Adjudication Officer and Another and Secretary of State for Social Services v Fairey HL 21-May-1997
The provision of an interpreter for a deaf person was included in range of care needed for attendance for Disability Living Allowance. Dealing with his soiled laundry was not so included: ‘In my opinion it is not enough to ask whether the act in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.178886

Hourigan on Behalf of her Mother Mary Hourigan (Deceased) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 19 Dec 2002

The regulations appeared to deem that the deceased had held a half share in the house when in fact she owned only a one sixth share. The result was that she had been disallowed Income Support.
Held: The regulations applied where two or more people were interested in the same capital asset. Since the property was owned in separate shares, there was no need to treat her as a joint owner, and benefit had been wrongly withheld. The attempt by the respondent to justify the interpretation, which was on the basis of administrative convenience failed. Much clearer words would be required to allow such an unfair conclusion, requiring someone to dip into capital which was not their own before claiming benefit.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

Times 28-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1890

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 (SI 1987 No 1967) 52

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178554

Robertson v Fife Council: HL 25 Jul 2002

The local authority considered providing residential care to the applicant. She had given away her former home, and they sought to take into account notional capital attributed to her as if the house had not been given away. Having done so, it declined to assist.
Held: The obligation to provide care was a separate duty and was not to be run together with the consequences of the assessment of financial resources when the authority considered whether to offer assistance. The direction in section 12(3A) of the 1968 Act to disregard capital below one level was not a direction to take into account capital above that level. This did not mean that the patient should not be charged for the care provided. The need assessment came first, and the costs implications was a separate and second matter.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hope of Craighead and Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough

Citations:

Times 08-Aug-2002, [2002] UKHL 35, (2002) 68 BMLR 229, (2002) 5 CCL Rep 543, 2003 SCLR 39, 2002 SC (HL) 145, 2002 Hous LR 78, 2002 GWD 26-927, 2002 SLT 951

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968 12 12(3A) 12A 13A 55, Community Care (Residential Accommodation) Act 1998, National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Benefits, Local Government, Health

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174395

Naghshbandi v Camden London Borough Council and Others: CA 19 Jul 2002

A house was shared by five, one of whom was a student and therefore to be disregarded for Housing Benefit. Was the benefit for the others to be one fifth each, or one quarter?
Held: The student’s presence was to be disregarded. His presence was discounted and excluded from the calculation as if he were not liable to pay rent. The Housing benefit was to be calculated for each of the others at one fifth of the total, not one quarter.

Judges:

Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Jackson

Citations:

Times 06-Aug-2002, Gazette 26-Sep-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1038

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 (SI 1987 No 1971) 48A, Social Security (Students Loans and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 1990 (SI 1990 No 1549)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174348

Oliveira v Commission: ECFI 19 Mar 1997

Social policy – European Social Fund – Assistance in the financing of vocational training measures – New decision following a judgment of the Court of Justice – Legal certainty – Legitimate expectations – Prohibition of reformatio in pejus – Reasonable time.

Citations:

T-73/95, [1997] EUECJ T-73/95

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.173008

Josu Miguel Dyaz Garcya v European Parliament: ECFI 18 Dec 1992

ECJ 1. Under Article 2(4) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, the treatment, as a dependent child, of a person whom an official has a legal responsibility to maintain and whose maintenance involves heavy expenditure constitutes an exceptional step. The condition that the official must have a legal responsibility to maintain a person other than a dependent child must for that reason be interpreted strictly. The concept of ‘a legal responsibility to maintain’ used in the Staff Regulations is derived from the legal systems of the Member States, which, under their laws, impose a mutual responsibility to provide maintenance on relatives by blood and/or marriage of a greater or lesser degree of proximity. That concept must therefore be understood as referring exclusively to an obligation maintenance imposed on an official by a source of law independent of the will of the parties and as excluding maintenance obligations of a contractual, moral or compensatory nature. Since neither Community law nor the Staff Regulations provide the Community court with any guide as to how it should define, by way of independent interpretation, the meaning and scope of a legal responsibility to maintain, entitling an official to receive a dependent child allowance under Article 2(4) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, it is necessary to determine whether the national legal system to which the official in question is subject imposes such a legal responsibility on the official. 2. The terms of a provision of Community law which makes no express reference to the laws of the Member States for the purpose of determining its meaning and scope must normally be given an independent interpretation, which must take into account the context of the provision and the purpose of the relevant regulations. In the absence of an express reference to the laws of the Member States, the application of Community law may sometimes necessitate a reference to the laws of the Member States where the Community court cannot identify in Community law or in the general principles of Community law criteria enabling it to define the meaning and scope of such a provision by way of independent interpretation. 3. An official has no legitimate interest in the annulment of a decision for breach of procedural requirements where the administration has no scope for the exercise of discretion but is bound to act as it has done. In such a case, the annulment of the contested decision could lead only to the adoption of another decision identical in substance to the decision annulled.

Citations:

T-43/90, [1992] EUECJ T-43/90

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Children, Benefits

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172447

Charles Fairbank v Lambeth Magistrates’ Court: Admn 25 Apr 2002

The appellant applied for housing benefit. He completed a form which asked if he owned other properties. He had been prosecuted for failing to disclose ownership of a property. He requested the court to consider whether he had a duty to disclose property which he held as bare trustee.
Held: The regulations defined as the owner a person who ‘is for the time being entitled to dispose of the fee simple, whether or not with the consent of other joint owners’. A conviction required the prosecution to demonstrate that he did not know of the need to declare the ownership. In this case the ownership did require declaration. Whether he knew it to be false was a question of fact and the first instance court having heard the evidence, its judgement should not be interfered with. The court was not concerned with the proceeds of sale, only with current entitlement to sell.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy & Mr Justice Leveson

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 785 (Admin), [2002] EWHC 772 (QB)

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Act 1992 112, Housing Benefits (General) Regulations 1987 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Sedgemoor District Council Housing Benefit Review Board ex parte Weaden 1986
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172204

Anufrijeva v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 22 Mar 2002

Three asylum-seekers brought claims of breach of their Article 8 rights. One complained of a local authority’s failure to provide accommodation to meet special needs, the other two of maladministration and delay in the handling of their asylum applications.
Held: All three claims failed. The essential object of article 8 is to protect individuals against arbitrary interference by public authorities, but it may also give rise to positive obligations.
Lord Woolf CJ said: ‘The remedy of damages generally plays a less prominent role in actions based on breaches of the articles of the Convention, than in actions based on breaches of private law obligations where, more often than not, the only remedy claimed is damages. Where an infringement of an individual’s human rights has occurred, the concern will usually be to bring the infringement to an end and any question of compensation will be of secondary, if any, importance.’ and ‘We find it hard to conceive . . of a situation in which the predicament of an individual will be such that article 8 requires him to be provided with welfare support, where his predicament is not sufficiently severe to engage article 3. Article 8 may more readily be engaged where a family unit is involved. Where the welfare of children is at stake, article 8 may require the provision of welfare support in a manner which enables family life to continue.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf CJ, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR and Auld LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 399, [2004] QB 1124

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (on the Application of Anufrijeva) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another Admn 25-Oct-2001
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Anufrijeva HL 26-Jun-2003
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 . .
Cited – Regina (Amicus etc) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Admn 26-Apr-2004
The claimants sought a declaration that part of the Regulations were invalid, and an infringement of their human rights. The Regulations sought to exempt church schools from an obligation not to discriminate against homosexual teachers.
Held: . .
Cited – Andrews v Reading Borough Council QBD 29-Apr-2004
The claimant sought damages for increased road noise resulting from traffic control measures taken by the respondent.
Held: The defendants action to strike out the claim could not succeed. They had not shown that the claim was unarguable, . .
Cited – Greenfield, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
The appellant had been charged with and disciplined for a prison offence. He was refused legal assistance at his hearing, and it was accepted that the proceedings involved the determination of a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6 of the . .
Cited – Dobson and others v Thames Water Utilities Ltd and Another CA 29-Jan-2009
The claimants complained of odours and mosquitoes affecting their properties from the activities of the defendants in the conduct of their adjoining Sewage Treatment plant. The issue was as to the rights of non title holders to damages in nuisance . .
Cited – McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 6-Jul-2011
The claimant, a former prima ballerina, had suffered injury as she grew old. She came to suffer a condition requiring her to urinate at several points during each night. The respondent had been providing a carer to stay with her each night to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170088

Tina Yasmin Flemming v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 10 May 2002

Judges:

Lord Justice Chadwick, Pill LJ, Longmore LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 641, [2002] 1 WLR 2322

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 70(3), Social Security (Invalid Care Allowance) Regulations 1976 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Deane CA 23-Jun-2010
Care Allowance withheld for full time student
The claimant cared for her daughter but then commenced a university degree course. Being in full time education, her entitlement to Invalid Care Allowance was withheld. The Secretary of State appealed against a re-instatement of the benefit.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Education

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170304

Moyna v The Secretary of State for Social Security: CA 27 Mar 2002

The claimant a former civil servant had retired due to ill health, and appealed refusal of disability living allowance. The court did not accept that one could have facts on which different tribunals could properly reach different conclusions about whether the ‘cooking test’ had been satisfied. The test was intended to be ‘straightforward’ and produce the same answer on the same facts. The provision of a cooked main meal was something required ‘not on an occasional basis but on a regular basis if someone is to enjoy a reasonable quality of life’. If the inability to cook was on ‘no more than occasional days’, the test would not be satisfied. But if there was a ‘clear pattern’ of a person not being able to provide for himself, it would.

Judges:

Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss P, Potter and Kay LJJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 408

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal From – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Moyna SSCS 31-Jul-2003
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Moyna v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 31-Jul-2003
The appellant had applied for and been refused disability living allowance on the basis of being able to carry out certain cooking tasks.
Held: The purpose of the ‘cooking test’ is not to ascertain whether the applicant can survive, or enjoy a . .
Cited – Stancliffe Stone Company Ltd v Peak District National Park Authority CA 17-Jun-2005
In 1952, the Minister wrote a leter confirming the planning permissions for four quarries now owned by the claimants. In 1996, two of the quarries were separately included in a list of dormant sites, and in 19999 the applicant began to apply for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170104

Duchon v Pensionsversicherungsanstalt der Angestellten: ECJ 18 Apr 2002

Europa Social security for migrant workers – Article 48 and Article 51 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 and Article 42 EC) – Article 9a and 94 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Accident at work occurring in another Member State before the entry into force of the regulation in the worker’s home State – Incapacity for work

Judges:

P. Jann, President of the Chamber, S. von Bahr, and M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), Judges, Advocate General: F.G. Jacobs, Registrar: R. Grass

Citations:

C-290/00, [2002] EUECJ C-290/00

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Benefits

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170166

Pridding v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 4 Mar 2002

The claimant received Invalid Care Allowance. His mother, the person he cared for was admitted to hospital, and stayed in hospital for more than three months. Her attendance allowance was stopped, but he continued his claim. The Department reclaimed the allowance for the times when his mother’s Attendance or Disability Living Allowance was suspended because of her stay in hospital.
Held: The Individual Care Allowance continued only for so long as did the Attendance Allowance or Disability Living Allowance. The allowance could not be payable without one of the others being payable. Section 70(2) contained an exclusive definition of a severely disabled persons for these purposes.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Laws and Lord Justice Keene

Citations:

Times 03-Apr-2002, Gazette 11-Apr-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 306

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 70(2), Social Security (Severe Disablement Allowance and Invalid Care Allowance) Amendment Regulations 1994 (SI 1994 No 2556) 2(3), Social Security (Invalid Care Allowance) Regulations 1976 (SI 1976 No 409) 4(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168118

Hooper and others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 14 Feb 2002

The claimants alleged that the way they were treated as widowers under the benefits subjected them to discrimination.
Held: The continued payment of widow’s pension was objectively justified.

Judges:

Moses J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 191 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the application of Smith) v Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council and another Admn 19-Nov-2002
The applicants sought to argue that the attempt to evict him from the caravan site he occupied infringed his article 8 and 14 rights. Though the Isaacs case had decided there was good reason to deny security, he argued that was no longer applicable, . .
Appeal from – Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 18-Jun-2003
The appellants were widowers whose wives had died at a time when the benefits a widow would have received were denied to widowers. The legislation had since changed but they variously sought compensation for the unpaid sums.
Held: The appeal . .
At first instance – Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 5-May-2005
Widowers claimed that, in denying them benefits which would have been payable to widows, the Secretary of State had acted incompatibly with their rights under article 14 read with article 1 of Protocol 1 and article 8 of the ECHR.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168033

Lowe v Guise: CA 26 Feb 2002

The claimant had care of his severely disabled brother. Following the accident he was unable to give the same level of care, though he continued to receive the care allowance.
Held: An injured claimant who worked, albeit gratuitously, for his family suffered the loss of being able to contribute the value of his service to the needs of his family. That loss was genuine and sounded in damages. To allow otherwise would be to make the loss of an ability to garden measurable in damages but not the ability to care for a family member.

Judges:

Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Rix and Mr Justice Morland

Citations:

Times 25-Mar-2002, Gazette 11-Apr-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 197

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Benefits, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167956

Secretary of State for Social Security v Walter: CA 6 Dec 2001

Where a full time student became pregnant and had to suspend her studies, the regulations still treated her as a student, and disentitled her from benefits. The claimant alleged that this was sex discrimination.
Held: It was not. The starting point had to be that the Regulations made no explicit distinction between a man and a woman, nor with whether a woman was pregnant or not. She claimed that she had suffered a detriment and that since it was associated with her benefit it was discriminatory. Not everything which affected pregnant women was discriminatory.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Robert Walker And Lord Justice Keene

Citations:

Times 13-Dec-2001, Gazette 06-Feb-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 1913

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Jobseekers Allowance Regulations 1996 (SI 1996 No 207), Equal Treatment Directive 79/7/EEC (OJ 1979 L6/24)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Webb v EMO Air Cargo ECJ 14-Jul-1994
Community Law protects women from dismissal during pregnancy save in exceptional circumstances. It was discriminatory to dismiss a female not on a fixed term contract for pregnancy. The Court rejected an interpretation of the Directive that would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Benefits

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167841

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Lassal: CA 10 Mar 2009

The court referred the case to the ECJ.

Judges:

Waller LJ VP, Arden LJ, Moore-Bick LJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 157

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2004/38/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Reference – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Lassal ECJ 11-May-2010
(European Citizenship) (Opinion) Directive 2004/38/EC Right of Union citizens to reside in the territory of the Member States Article 16(1) Right of permanent residence – Residence for a continuous period of five years Taking into account periods of . .
Reference – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Lassal ECJ 7-Oct-2010
Reference for preliminary ruling – Freedom of movement for persons – Directive 2004/38/EC – Article 16 – Right of permanent residence – Temporal application – Periods completed before the date of transposition . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Benefits

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.317903

Regina (on the Application of Nahar) v The Social Security Commissioners: Admn 21 Dec 2001

A finding of fact by one government department is not necessarily binding as such on any other department. The claimant sought a pension as the widow of a British citizen. The Home Office had accepted her marriage certificate as binding, but the Benefits Directorate had rejected it as a forgery.
Held: No issue estoppel arose. There was no sufficient degree of identity between different government departments, and the minister exercised the powers in his own name, not the Crown. The department which had rejected the certificate had not been involved in the earlier finding, and the evidence upon which the two findings had been made differed.

Judges:

Justice Munby

Citations:

Times 21-Jan-2002, Gazette 06-Mar-2002, [2001] EWHC Admin 1049

Links:

Bailii

Benefits, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167374

Northern Ireland Devolution Issues, A Reference By The Attorney General (Northern Ireland): SC 5 Feb 2020

Devolution issue arises as to Act of NI Minister

The basis for the Attorney’s reference is his assertion that the universal credit provisions in question breach articles 8, 12 and 14 of the ECHR and article 1 of the first protocol to the ECHR and are therefore invalid per section 24 of the 1998 Act.
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously refused to accept the Attorney General’s application to refer this issue to the court under paragraph 34 of Schedule 10 to the 1998 Act. For a devolution issue to arise, it must be shown that an act or function has been carried out by a Northern Ireland minister or department, and that the act in question is invalid by reason of s. 24.

Judges:

Lady Hale, Lord Reed, Lord Kerr

Citations:

[2020] UKSC 2

Links:

Bailii, Summary

Statutes:

Northern Ireland Act 1998, Welfare Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 2015, European Cnvention on Human Rights 8 12 14, Northern Ireland (Welfare Reform) Act 2015

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Cited – Northern Ireland of devolution issues, Reference by the Attorney General for (Northern Ireland) SC 14-Jan-2019
Five questions referred by the Attorney General for Northern Ireland.
Held: The matter was adjourned: ‘it is desirable that legal questions be determined against the background of a clear factual matrix, rather than as theoretical or academic . .
Cited – SC and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Others CA 16-Apr-2019
Challenge to two child limit for child tax credit. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.647068

Regina v Ssat Chairman Ex Parte O’Hara: QBD 7 Dec 1994

Chairman’s refusal to allow renewal of an appeal out of time for a claimant with Down’s syndrome was not Wednesbury unreasonable. The regulations expressly forbade a renewal of such an application once refused.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Dec-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88680

Regina v North Yorkshire County Council Ex Parte Hargreaves: QBD 12 Jun 1997

The local authority’s duty to facilitate holidays for the disabled includes the power to fund the basic cost of such holidays.

Citations:

Times 12-Jun-1997

Statutes:

Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Regina v North Yorkshire County Council Ex Parte Hargreaves QBD 9-Nov-1994
Both the patient and the carer were to be consulted on which place of respite care was to be offered. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Local Government, Benefits

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88574

Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security Ex Parte Nessa: QBD 15 Nov 1994

Regulations under which payments were made for funeral benefits were not susceptible to a challenge under the Race Relations Act, since they were an act of the Crown.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Feb-1995, Times 15-Nov-1994

Statutes:

Race Relations Act 1976 20

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Nessa v Chief Adjudication Officer CA 5-Feb-1998
The requirement that an applicant for income support must show ‘Habitual residence’ required a demonstration that in the applicant was in the UK voluntarily for settled purposes and an appreciable time should pass before income a support claim was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Benefits

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88613

SC and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Others: CA 16 Apr 2019

Challenge to two child limit for child tax credit.

Judges:

Patten, Leggatt, Nicola Davies LJJ

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 615, [2019] 4 All ER 787, [2019] 1 WLR 5687, [2019] WLR(D) 233

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – SC, CB and 8 Children, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Others SC 9-Jul-2021
The Supreme Court was asked to decide whether the ‘two child limit’, a provision of primary legislation which restricts payment of amounts of subsistence benefit for children to the first two children in a family, is incompatible with the . .
Cited – Northern Ireland Devolution Issues, A Reference By The Attorney General (Northern Ireland) SC 5-Feb-2020
Devolution issue arises as to Act of NI Minister
The basis for the Attorney’s reference is his assertion that the universal credit provisions in question breach articles 8, 12 and 14 of the ECHR and article 1 of the first protocol to the ECHR and are therefore invalid per section 24 of the 1998 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.635958

Ruhr v Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit: ECJ 25 Oct 2001

ECJ Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Nationals of non-Member countries – Members of a worker’s family – Rights acquired directly and rights derived through others – Unemployment benefit

Citations:

C-189/00, [2001] EUECJ C-189/00, [2001] ECR I-8225, ECLI:EU:C:2001:583

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166768

Khalil, Chabaan, Osseili v Bundesantalt fir Arbeit: ECJ 11 Oct 2001

(Social security for migrant workers) Social security – Article 51 of the EEC Treaty (later Article 51 of the EC Treaty and now, after amendment, Article 42 EC) – Article 2(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Stateless persons – Refugees

Citations:

[2001] ECR I-7413, [2001] EUECJ C-95/99, C-95/99, [2001] 3 CMLR 50

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Patmalniece v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 16-Mar-2011
The claimant challenged as incompatible with EU law, the Regulations which restricted the entitlement to state pension credit to those entitled to reside in the UK.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority). The conditions imposed by the Regulations . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166662

Cornwell v United Kingdom; Leary v United Kingdom: ECHR 25 Apr 2000

Mr Cornwell’s wife had died on 24 October 1989, leaving a dependent child. On 7 February 1997 his representative had ‘contacted’ the Benefits Agency to enquire about widow’s benefits. On 14 February 1997 the Agency ‘answered’ to say that legislation provided only for widows and not widowers. On 28 March 1997 the Agency confirmed that if Mrs Cornwell’s record had been that of a man, her survivor would have been entitled to Widow’s Payment and WMA. The position of the Government was set out in the decision as follows: ‘The Government contest the admissibility of the application insofar as it relates to the period 24 October 1989 to 7 February 1996. They point out that the applicant did not attempt to claim widows’ benefits until 7 February 1997 and that it was only from this date onwards that the legislation was applied to him. Had a woman claimed widows’ benefits on 7 February 1997 in respect of the death of her husband in October 1989, she would have been told that she was out of time for claiming a widow’s payment and that she could only claim widowed mothers’ allowance with effect from 8 February 1996. The UK had agreed to pay the benefit equally until the coming into force of legislation which would correct the situation.

Citations:

Times 10-May-2000, 36578/97, (2000) 27 EHRR CD62, [2000] ECHR 167, [2000] ECHR 168

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 18-Jun-2003
The appellants were widowers whose wives had died at a time when the benefits a widow would have received were denied to widowers. The legislation had since changed but they variously sought compensation for the unpaid sums.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 5-May-2005
Widowers claimed that, in denying them benefits which would have been payable to widows, the Secretary of State had acted incompatibly with their rights under article 14 read with article 1 of Protocol 1 and article 8 of the ECHR.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Benefits, Discrimination

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165864

Regina v Housing Benefit Review Board of The City of Westminster, Ex Parte Mehanne: HL 8 Mar 2001

The applicants had taken a house to rent and claimed benefits. The rent officer determined that the rent was not excessive, but ten days later the housing benefits officer for the same authority determined that it was.
Held: Although the wording of the section when re-enacted changed, and the Board had to impose some deduction, it retained a discretion as to the extent to which the rent might be reduced, and may allow for other factors which might affect the decision.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Browne-Wilkinson Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Hutton Lord Hobhouse Of Wood- borough

Citations:

[2001] 2 All ER 690, [2001] UKHL 11, [2001] 1 WLR 539

Links:

Bailii, House of Lords

Statutes:

Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 11, Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162919

Jauch v Pensionsversicherungsanstalt der Arbeiter: ECJ 8 Mar 2001

ECJ (Judgment) Social security for migrant workers – Austrian scheme of insurance against the risk of reliance on care – Classification of benefits and lawfulness of the residence condition from the point of view of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71

Citations:

[2001] EUECJ C-215/99, [2001] ECR I-1901, ECLI:EU:C:2001:139

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Tolley SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court was asked whether the United Kingdom is precluded, by Council Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, self-employed persons and members of their families moving within the Community, . .
Applied – Commission v Parliament and Council (Free Movement of Persons) ECJ 3-May-2007
ECJ Action for annulment – Social security – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Articles 4(2a) and 10a – Annex IIa – Regulation (EC) No 647/2005 – Special non-contributory benefits . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162665

Borawitz v Landesversicherungsanstalt Westfalen: ECJ 21 Sep 2000

(Free movement of persons) (Judgment) Social security for migrant workers – Equal treatment – National legislation fixing, in connection with the transfer abroad of retroactive pension payments, a higher minimum amount than that paid within the country
‘the object of article 3(1) of Regulation No 1408/71 is to ensure, in accordance with [article 39 EC], equal treatment in matters of social security, without distinction based on nationality, for the persons to whom that regulation applies by abolishing all discrimination in that regard deriving from the national legislation of the Member States
It is settled case law that the principle of equal treatment, as laid down in that article, prohibits not only overt discrimination based on the nationality of the beneficiaries of social security schemes but also all covert forms of discrimination which, through the application of other distinguishing criteria, lead in fact to the same result . .
Accordingly, conditions imposed by national law must be regarded as indirectly discriminatory where, although applicable irrespective of nationality, they affect essentially migrant workers or where the great majority of those affected are migrant workers, as well as conditions which are applicable without distinction but can more easily be satisfied by national workers than by migrant workers or where there is a risk that they may operate to the particular detriment of migrant workers (Case C-237/94 O’Flynn v Adjudication Officer [1996] ECR I-2617, paragraph 18).
It is otherwise only if those provisions are justified by objective considerations independent of the nationality of the workers concerned, and if they are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued by the national law . .’

Citations:

C-124/99, [2000] EUECJ C-124/99, [2000] ECR I-7293

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Patmalniece v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 16-Mar-2011
The claimant challenged as incompatible with EU law, the Regulations which restricted the entitlement to state pension credit to those entitled to reside in the UK.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority). The conditions imposed by the Regulations . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162635

Fahmi and Esmoris Cerdeiro-Pinedo Amado v Bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank: ECJ 20 Mar 2001

ECJ Judgment – Article 41 of the EEC-Morocco Cooperation Agreement – Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Social security – Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 – Articles 48 and 52 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 39 EC and 43 EC) – Freedom of movement for persons – Non-discrimination – Recipients of an invalidity pension no longer residing in the competent Member State – Amendment of the legislation on study finance

Citations:

[2001] ECR I-2415, [2003] 1 CMLR 45, ECLI:EU:C:2001:176, [2001] EUECJ C-33/99, C-33/99

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71

European, Benefits

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162596

Regina 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 that this was discrimination arising from his sex.
Held: The Directive provided for services including those relating to the age of the applicant, this benefit was one such, and the rules were discriminatory and unlawful.
Europa Directive 79/7/EEC – Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security – Grant of a winter fuel payment – Link with pensionable age. Case C-382/98.
1 Social policy – Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security – Matters covered by Directive 79/7 – Winter fuel payment payable to those who have reached a minimum age rather than on the basis of a lack of financial means – Included (Council Directive 79/7, Art. 3(1)) 2 Social policy – Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security – Directive 79/7 – Derogation allowed in respect of possible consequences for other benefits of different pensionable ages – Scope -Limited to forms of discrimination necessarily and objectively linked to the difference in pensionable ages – Discrimination with regard to grant of a winter fuel payment – Excluded (Council Directive 79/7, Art. 7(2)(a))
Article 3(1) of Directive 79/7 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security, which defines the matters covered by the Directive, must be interpreted as meaning that a winter fuel payment, which is part of a statutory scheme, is covered by that directive in so far as payment of the benefit is always subject to the recipients having reached statutory retirement age and it is therefore aimed at protecting them against the risk of old age mentioned in that article. The benefit may be granted to elderly persons, even if they do not have financial difficulties, so that protection against a lack of financial means cannot be considered to be the aim of the benefit. 2 The derogation from the principle of equal treatment for men and women laid down in Article 7(1)(a) of Directive 79/7 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security is not applicable to a benefit such as the winter fuel payment, which is subject to the condition that the recipient has reached statutory retirement age, that is to say the age of 60 for women and 65 for men. Such discrimination is not objectively and necessarily linked to the difference in retirement age for men and women. First, from the point of view of the financial equilibrium of the social security system, it is not necessary either for the financial equilibrium of contributory pension schemes, in view of the fact that the benefits are granted under a non-contributory scheme, or for the financial equilibrium of the social security system as a whole. Secondly, from the point of view of consistency between the retirement pension scheme and the other benefit scheme, it is not required, since if the benefit is designed to provide protection against the risk of old age and must, therefore, be paid only to those above a certain age, it does not follow that that age must necessarily coincide with the statutory age of retirement and, as a result, be different for men and women.

Citations:

Times 25-Jan-2000, C-382/98, [1999] EUECJ C-382/98, [1999] ECR I-8955

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Fund Winter Fuel Payment Amendment Regulations 1998 No 1910

Citing:

Cited – Amministrazione 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 . .

Cited by:

Cited – Mcdermott 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, European, Benefits

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162518

Nijhuis v Bestuur van het Landelijk Instituut Sociale Verzekeringen: ECJ 20 Apr 1999

(Judgment) (Rec 1999,p I-1919) Social security – Incapacity for work – Special scheme for civil servants – Point 4(a) of Section J of Annex VI to Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Articles 48 and 51 of the EC Treaty

Citations:

C-360/97, [1999] EUECJ C-360/97

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162252

Swaddling 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.
Europa Article 10a of Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Regulation No 2001/83, as amended by Regulation No 1247/92, read together with Article 1(h) thereof, precludes the Member State of origin – in the case of a person who has exercised his right to freedom of movement in order to establish himself in another Member State, in which he has worked and set up his habitual residence, and who has returned to his Member State of origin, where his family lives, in order to seek work – from making entitlement to one of the benefits referred to in Article 10a of Regulation No 1408/71 conditional upon `habitual residence’ in that State, which presupposes not only an intention to reside there, but also completion of an appreciable period of residence there.

Citations:

Times 04-Mar-1999, C-90/97, [1999] ECRI-1075], [1999] EUECJ C-90/97

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Nessa 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, European

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.162068

Kuusijarvi v Riksforsakringsverket: ECJ 11 Jun 1998

ECJ (Judgment) Social security – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Personal scope – Parental benefit – Maintenance of entitlement to benefits after transfer of residence to another Member State

Citations:

[1998] ECR I-3443, [1998] EUECJ C-275/96, ECLI:EU:C:1998:279

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Tolley SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court was asked whether the United Kingdom is precluded, by Council Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, self-employed persons and members of their families moving within the Community, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161931

Baldone v INAMI: ECJ 25 Sep 1997

(Judgment) Article 95a of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Regulation (EEC) No 1248/92 – Transitional provisions – Recalculation of a benefit on the competent institution’s own initiative – Rights of persons concerned

Citations:

C-307/96, [1997] EUECJ C-307/96

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161947

Molenaar v Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse Baden-Wurttemberg: ECJ 5 Mar 1998

ECJ (Judgment) Freedom of movement for workers – Benefits designed to cover the risk of reliance on care

Citations:

[1998] ECR I-843, [1998] EUECJ C-160/96

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Applied – Commission v Parliament and Council (Free Movement of Persons) ECJ 3-May-2007
ECJ Action for annulment – Social security – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Articles 4(2a) and 10a – Annex IIa – Regulation (EC) No 647/2005 – Special non-contributory benefits . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Tolley SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court was asked whether the United Kingdom is precluded, by Council Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, self-employed persons and members of their families moving within the Community, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161862

Martinez Sala v Freistaat Bayern: ECJ 12 May 1998

ECJ A benefit such as the child-raising allowance, which is automatically granted to persons fulfilling certain objective criteria, without any individual and discretionary assessment of personal needs, and which is intended to meet family expenses, falls within the scope ratione materiae of Community law as a family benefit within the meaning of Article 4(1)(h) of Regulation No 1408/71.
A benefit such as the child-raising allowance, which is automatically granted to persons fulfilling certain objective criteria, without any individual and discretionary assessment of personal needs, and which is intended to meet family expenses, falls within the scope ratione materiae of Community law as a social advantage within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1612/68.
The concept of social advantage covers all the advantages which, whether or not linked to a contract of employment, are generally granted to national workers primarily because of their objective status as workers or by virtue of the mere fact of their residence on the national territory and whose extension to workers who are nationals of other Member States therefore seems likely to facilitate the mobility of such workers within the Community.
There is no single definition of worker in Community law: it varies according to the area in which the definition is to be applied. For instance, the definition of worker used in the context of Article 48 of the Treaty and Regulation No 1612/68 does not necessarily coincide with the definition applied in relation to Article 51 of the Treaty and Regulation No 1408/71.
In the context of Article 48 of the Treaty and Regulation No 1612/68, a person who, for a certain period of time, performs services for and under the direction of another person in return for which he receives remuneration must be considered to be a worker.
On the other hand, a person has the status of employed person within the meaning of Regulation No 1408/71 where he is covered, even if only in respect of a single risk, compulsorily or on an optional basis, by a general or special social security scheme mentioned in Article 1(a) of Regulation No 1408/71, irrespective of the existence of an employment relationship.
A national of a Member State lawfully residing in the territory of another Member State comes within the scope ratione personae of the provisions of the Treaty on European citizenship and can rely on the rights laid down by the Treaty which Article 8(2) attaches to the status of citizen of the Union, including the right, laid down in Article 6, not to suffer discrimination on grounds of nationality within the scope of application ratione materiae of the Treaty.
Community law precludes a Member State from requiring nationals of other Member States authorised to reside in its territory to produce a formal residence permit issued by the national authorities in order to receive a child-raising allowance, whereas that Member State’s own nationals are only required to be permanently or ordinarily resident in that Member State.
For the purposes of the grant of the benefit in question, possession of a residence permit cannot be constitutive of the right to the benefit when, for the purposes of recognition of the right of residence, it has only declaratory and probative force.
‘Article 8(2) of the Treaty attaches to the status of citizen of the Union the rights and duties laid down by the Treaty, including the right, laid down in article 6 of the Treaty, not to suffer discrimination on grounds of nationality within the scope of application ratione materiae of the Treaty.’

Judges:

GC Rodriguez Iglesias, P

Citations:

[1998] ECR 1-2691, [1998] EUECJ C-85/96, [1998] ECR I-2591

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Kaczmarek v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 27-Nov-2008
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 . .
Cited – O’Brien v Ministry of Justice SC 28-Jul-2010
The appellant had worked as a part time judge. He now said that he should be entitled to a judicial pension on retirement by means of the Framework Directive. The Regulations disapplied the provisions protecting part time workers for judicial office . .
Cited – Zagorski and Baze, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and Others Admn 29-Nov-2010
The claimants, in the US awaiting execution for murders, challenged the permitting by the defendant for export of the chemical Sodium Thipental which would be used for their execution. The respondent said that its use in general anaesthesia practice . .
Cited – Prix v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 31-Oct-2012
The claimant had come from France to England, and worked as a teaching assistant. She set out on a course to train as a teacher but became pregnant, gave up the course, and eventually gave up work temporarily. Her claim to Income Support was refused . .
Cited – X v Mid Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau and Another SC 12-Dec-2012
The appellant was disabled, had legal qualifications, and worked with the respondent as a volunteer. She had sought assistance under the Disability Discrimination Act, now the 2012 Act, saying that she counted as a worker. The tribunal and CA had . .
Applied – Revenue and Customs v Ruas CA 23-Mar-2010
The court was asked whether an obligation arose to pay child benefit for the children of a Portuguese worker resident here but no longer working for his children living in Portugal.
Held: The benefit was payable. . .
Cited – Tolley (Deceased) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 23-Oct-2013
The Court was asked as to entitlement to receive the care component of disability living allowance when she moved permanently from the United Kingdom to Spain. . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Tolley SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court was asked whether the United Kingdom is precluded, by Council Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, self-employed persons and members of their families moving within the Community, . .
Cited – The United States of America v Nolan SC 21-Oct-2015
Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed.
Cited – Nouazli, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Apr-2016
The court considered the compatibility with EU law of regulations 21 and 24 of the 2006 Regulations, and the legality at common law of the appellant’s administrative detention from 3 April until 6 June 2012 and of bail restrictions thereafter until . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161807

The Queen v Secretary of State for Social Security, ex parte Sutton: ECJ 22 Apr 1997

(Judgment) Directive 79/7/EEC – Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security – Responsibility of a Member State for an infringement of Community law – Right to receive interest on arrears of social security benefits

Citations:

[1997] 2 CMLR 382, [1997] EUECJ C-66/95, [1997] CEC 1110, [1997] All ER (EC) 497, [1997] ICR 961, [1997] IRLR 524, [1997] ECR I-2163

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161532

Bastos Moriana and others v Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit: ECJ 27 Feb 1997

(Judgment) Articles 77(2)(b)(i) and 78(2)(b)(i) of Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Regulation No 2001/83, must be interpreted as meaning that the competent institution of a Member State is not bound to grant supplementary family benefits to pensioners or orphans residing in another Member State where the amount of the family benefits paid by the Member State of residence is lower than that of the benefits provided for by the laws of the first Member State if entitlement to the pension, or to the orphan’s pension, has been acquired not solely by virtue of insurance periods completed in that State but by virtue of the application of the aggregation rules provided for by the regulation.
Entitlement to supplementary family benefits over and above the benefits paid by the State of residence presupposes entitlement to a pension, or to an orphan’s pension, acquired solely under the legislation of a Member State other than the State of residence. Where the entitlement of the pensioner or orphan exists only by virtue of the application of the aggregation rules provided for by the regulation, the application of Articles 77 and 78, which provide for benefits to be granted in accordance with the laws of the State of residence, does not deprive the persons concerned of the benefits granted solely under the legislation of another Member State.

Citations:

C-59/95, [1997] EUECJ C-59/95

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161528

Taflan-Met and others (Rec 1996,p I-4085): ECJ 10 Sep 1996

ECJ (Judgment) 1. In the absence of any express provision on its entry into force, Decision No 3/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council on the application of the social security schemes of the Member States to Turkish workers and members of their families entered into force on the date on which it was adopted and has been binding on the Contracting Parties since then. It follows from Articles 6, 22(1) and 23 of the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement that decisions of the Association Council are measures adopted by a body provided for by the Agreement and empowered by the Contracting Parties to adopt such measures. In so far as they implement the objectives set by the Agreement, such decisions are directly connected with the Agreement and, as a result of the second sentence of Article 22(1) thereof, have the effect of binding the Contracting Parties.
2. In common with provisions of agreements concluded by the Community with non-member countries, a provision adopted by an association council, set up by an association agreement to implement its provisions, must be regarded as being directly applicable when, regard being had to its wording and the purpose and nature of the agreement itself, the provision contains a clear and precise obligation which is not subject, in its implementation or effects, to the adoption of any subsequent measure.
Those conditions are not met by Decision No 3/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council on the application of the social security schemes of the Member States to Turkish workers and members of their families.
In the same way that Regulation No 1408/71, to which Decision No 3/80 refers and which is also intended to coordinate the different legislation of the Member States within the Community, required the adoption of implementing measures, which were embodied in Regulation No 574/72, by its nature Decision No 3/80 was intended to be supplemented and implemented in the Community by a subsequent act of the Council.
It follows that, so long as the supplementary measures essential for implementing Decision No 3/80 have not been adopted by the Council, Articles 12 and 13 of that decision do not have direct effect in the territory of the Member States and are therefore not such as to entitle individuals to rely on them before the national courts.

Citations:

C-277/94, [1996] EUECJ C-277/94

Links:

Bailii

European, Benefits

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161443

Hoever and Zachow v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen: ECJ 10 Oct 1996

ECJ Social security – Family benefits – Article 73 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Article 4(1) of Directive 79/7/EEC – Article 7(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68.

Citations:

C-245/94, [1996] EUECJ C-245/94

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 79/7/EEC 4(1), Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 7(2), Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 73

European, Benefits

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161425

Olivieri-Coenen v Bestuur van de Nieuwe Algemene Bedrijfsvereniging: ECJ 17 Oct 1995

ECJ Point 4(a) of the section on the Netherlands contained in Annex V of Regulation No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community, in the version applicable as from 1 February 1982, is to be interpreted as meaning that periods of paid employment include periods in which a person worked as a teacher under a contract of employment concluded with a private educational establishment, even if that person was insured during that period under a special scheme for civil servants and persons treated as such excluded from the scope of the regulation. If the period of paid employment subject in that way to that special scheme was not treated as a period of insurance for the purposes of Annex V to the regulation, the person completing it would thereby suffer a disadvantage contrary to Article 51 of the Treaty, whereas to take that period into account does not entail any overlapping of different entitlements.

Citations:

C-227/94, [1995] EUECJ C-227/94

Links:

Bailii

European, Benefits

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161408

Secretary of State for Social Security and Chief Adjudication Officer v Graham and others): ECJ 11 Aug 1995

The different pension ages for men and women, and to entitlement to associated invalidity benefits not discriminatory. Community law was not contravened by invalidity benefit being added to a pension.

Citations:

Times 25-Sep-1995, Ind Summary 09-Oct-1995, C-92/94, [1995] EUECJ C-92/94

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Treaty Article 177, Directive 79/7/EEC Article 7(1)(a)

Benefits, Discrimination, European

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161319