Category: Benefits

Koua Poirrez v France: ECHR 2005

The weakness of the analogy between many state contributory schemes and a private pension scheme is a reason to enlarge rather than restrict the scope of 1P1, treating it as applicable to all social security benefits whether contributory or non-contributory.

Citations:

(2005) 40 EHRR 34

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 1P1

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

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

Human Rights, Benefits

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.225370

Child Poverty Action Group, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary Of State for Work and Pensions: CA 14 Oct 2009

CPAG appealed against a refusal of a declaration that the respondent could use only the 1992 Act to recover overpayment of benefits where there had been neither misrepresentation nor non-disclosure.
Held: The appeal succeeded, and the court made a declaration that: ‘where a benefit falling within section 71(11) of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 is paid pursuant to the machinery contained in Part I Chapter II of the Social Security Act 1998, it can only be reclaimed from the claimant under section 71 of that Act (or some other specific statutory provision).’
There was no common law power which the respondent could rely upon to make recovery of overpayments in such a situation. The respondent could not use the law of restitution to recover accidental overpayments. The 1992 Act stated all the circumstances in which recovery could be made.

Judges:

Sedley LJ, Lloyd LJ, Wilson LJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 1058, Times 21-Oct-2009, [2010] 1 WLR 1886

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Administration Act 1992 71(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Child Poverty Action Group, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 27-Feb-2009
Challenge to defendant’s practice in seeking recovery of overpayments.
Held: The court refused to grant a declaration that the respondent could not use common law or equitable powers to recover over-payment of benefits where the payee had . .
Cited – Attorney General v De Keyser’s Royal Hotel Ltd HL 10-May-1920
A hotel had been requisitioned during the war for defence purposes. The owner claimed compensation. The AG argued that the liability to pay compensation had been displaced by statute giving the Crown the necessary powers.
Held: There is an . .
Cited – Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs HL 12-Mar-2008
The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations . .
Cited – Monro v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-Apr-2008
The Commissioners conceded that, in principle, there could be a common law right to recover sums paid by way of tax under a mistake of law, but argued that such a claim was precluded because it would be inconsistent with the statutory scheme under . .
Cited – Deutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v Inland Revenue and Another HL 25-Oct-2006
The tax payer had overpaid Advance Corporation Tax under an error of law. It sought repayment. The revenue contended that the claim was time barred.
Held: The claim was in restitution, and the limitation period began to run from the date when . .
Cited – Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners (2) HL 20-Jul-1992
The society had set out to assert that regulations were unlawful in creating a double taxation. It paid money on account of the tax demanded. It won and recovered the sums paid, but the revenue refused to pay any interest accrued on the sums paid. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – The Child Poverty Action Group v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 8-Dec-2010
The Action Group had obtained a declaration that, where an overpayment of benefits had arisen due to a miscalculation by the officers of the Department, any process of recovering the overpayment must be by the Act, and that the Department could not . .
Cited – Legal Services Commission v Henthorn QBD 4-Feb-2011
The claimant sought to recover overpayments said to have been made to the defendant barrister in the early 1990s. Interim payments on account had been made, but these were not followed by final accounts. The defendant, now retired, said that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Equity

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.376132

KB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: UTAA 2 Jul 2009

The claimant’s appeal to the Upper Tribunal is allowed. The decision of the Weymouth appeal tribunal dated 13 April 2007 involved an error on a point of law and is set aside. It is appropriate for the Upper Tribunal to re-make the decision on the claimant’s appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision dated 15 March 2006 (Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, section 12(2)(b)(ii) and (4)(a)). That decision is that the appeal is allowed and that the decision dated 1 February 2006 awarding the claimant the higher rate of the mobility component of disability living allowance and the middle rate of the care component for the period from 31 October 2005 to 20 October 2008 does not fall to be superseded on the ground of an anticipated relevant change of circumstances from and including 29 September 2006.

Citations:

[2009] UKUT 124 (AAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.375702

S, Regina (on the Application of) v A Social Security Commissioner and Others: Admn 3 Sep 2009

The Claimant sought judicial review of a decision of the Defendant Social Security Commissioner refusing the Claimant (and six other appellants) permission to appeal against a decision of a Social Security Appeal Tribunal relating to their housing benefit entitlement. ‘on behalf of’ in the 2006 Regulations was to be given the meaning of ‘in its place’ or ‘instead of’ rather than ‘for the benefit of’ or ‘in the interests of’ or as expressive of agency. Sir Thayne Forbes referred to authority here and in Australia as to the possible meanings of the phrase, and wrote in seeming approval of the parties’ common ground conclusions, based on those authorities, to the effect that : ‘the key principles to be derived from the various cases in which the words ‘on behalf of’ have been considered are as follows: (i) the phrase ‘on behalf of’ does not have a fixed meaning, it is not a term of art; (ii) the phrase is capable of bearing a wide range of meanings; and (iii) it will take its meaning in any particular case from its statutory context.’

Judges:

Sir Thayne Forbes

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2221 (Admin), [2010] PTSR 1785, (2009) 12 CCL Rep 654

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit (Consequential Provisions) Regulations 2006 Sch 3 4(10)

Cited by:

Approved – Rochdale Borough Council v Dixon CA 20-Oct-2011
The defendant tenant had disputed payment of water service charges and stopped paying them. The Council obtained a possession order which was suspended on payment or arrears by the defendant at andpound;5.00. The tenant said that when varying the . .
Cited – Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd SC 12-Nov-2014
PPI Sale – No Recovery from Remote Parties
The claimant sought repayment of payment protection insurance premiums paid by her under a policy with Norwich Union. The immediate broker arranging the loan was now insolvent, and she sought repayment from the second and other level intermediaties. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.374383

(Un-named) (HB): SSCS 14 Dec 2005

‘appeal from a decision of the tribunal dismissing the claimant’s appeal against a decision that he was not entitled to housing benefit or council tax benefit in respect of a claim made in June 2001. The claim was withdrawn in the course of a fraud investigation by the respondent housing authority, but it has since become apparent that the claimant might have been entitled to benefit if he had not taken that action. The appeal therefore raises the question of whether, in those circumstances, an award can be made on the claim notwithstanding its withdrawal.’

Citations:

[2005] UKSSCSC CH – 1815 – 2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.237897

RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 13 Jul 2006

Judges:

Goudie QC HHJ

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1761 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 28-Jun-2007
Whether a person who is entitled to income support and who would otherwise be entitled to disability premium as part of his IS loses his entitlement to DP during any period in which he is ‘without accommodation’. . .
At first Instance – RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 22-Oct-2008
The 1987 Regulations provided additional benefits for disabled persons, but excluded from benefit those who had nowhere to sleep. The claimant said this was irrational. He had been receiving the disability premium to his benefits, but this was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.244856

Secretary Of State for Work and Pensions v Dias: CA 31 Jul 2009

The court considered the application for income support by the claimant, a Portuguese national, which involved reconciliation of two objectives: ‘One is to promote freedom of movement within the EU. The other is to preserve the principle that migration should not unreasonably burden the social security system of the destination country.’
The status of ‘worker’ within European law was lost when, at the end of her period of maternity leave, a mother decided not to return to work but to continue to care for her son, albeit that she might return to work in the future.

Judges:

Waller VP, Hughes, Rimer LJJ

Citations:

[2010] 1 CMLR 4, [2009] EWCA Civ 807

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, European

Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.371879

Cabras v Institut National D’Assurance Maladie-Invalidite.: ECJ 21 Mar 1990

(Social Security For Migrant Workers) Article 46(3) of Council Regulation No 1408/71 must be interpreted as meaning that the highest theoretical amount of benefits calculated according to Article 46(2)(a) constitutes the limit on the benefits which may be claimed by a migrant worker under Community legislation, even where that theoretical amount is equal to the full benefit payable under the legislation of a single Member State. On that interpretation, the provisions in question are not incompatible with Article 51 of the EEC Treaty, since Article 46 of Regulation No 1408/71 is applicable only if it allows a migrant worker to be granted benefits at least as high as those payable under the legislation of one State alone.
When a recalculation of benefits pursuant to Article 51(2) of Regulation No 1408/71 leads to a reduction in the benefit paid by the institution of one Member State, without any adjustment to the benefit paid by the institution of another Member State, and the second institution thus holds no pension arrears payable to the recipient of the benefits, Article 112 of Regulation No 574/72 does not oblige the first institution to bear the expense of the benefits overpaid during the period needed for recalculating the benefits.

Citations:

C-199/88, R-199/88, [1990] EUECJ R-199/88

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.215768

Caisse nationale des prestations familiales v Wiering: ECJ 8 May 2014

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social security – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 – Family benefits – Allowance for bringing up a family – ‘Elterngeld’ – ‘Kindergeld’ – Calculation of the supplementary allowance

Judges:

T von Danwitz, P

Citations:

C-347/12, [2014] EUECJ C-347/12

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.525452

Zarzour, Regina (On the Application of) v London Borough Of Hillingdon: Admn 1 May 2009

The applicant was an asylum seeker awaiting a decision on his claim. He was totally blind, and needed help with dressing and laundry, with finding his way around his accommodation, and with shopping; he could not go out safely on his own.
Held: The request for judicial review was granted.

Judges:

Burnett J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1398 (Admin), (2009) 12 CCL Rep 429

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – SL v Westminster City Council SC 9-May-2013
The applicant for assistance from the respondent Council under the 1948 Act was a destitute, homeless failed asylum seeker. He had been admitted to hospital for psychiatric care, but the Council had maintained that his condition was part of and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Benefits

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347248

Patmalniece v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 25 Jun 2009

The appellant challenged the refusal of the grant to her of state pension credit.
Held: Her appeal failed.

Judges:

Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony MR, Moses, Sullivan LJJ

Citations:

[2009] 3 CMLR 36, [2010] PTSR 128, [2009] EWCA Civ 621, [2009] 4 All ER 738

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) 1408/71, State Pension Credit Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At CA – 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 . .
Cited – Bull and Another v Hall and Another SC 27-Nov-2013
The court was asked ‘Is it lawful for a Christian hotel keeper, who sincerely believes that sexual relations outside marriage are sinful, to refuse a double-bedded room to a same sex couple?’ The defendants (Mr and Mrs Bull) appealed against a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Benefits, Discrimination

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347200

Bewry, Regina (On the Application of) v Norwich City Council: Admn 31 Jul 2001

The claimant had sought housing benefits, but his claim was rejected by the respondents who said that he was not liable to make the payments. He argued that the decision was not made by an impartial tribunal since it was held by councillors from the authority which would benefit financially from the refusal of the claim.
Held: The claim succeeded: ‘ the claimant was deprived of his common law right to a determination of his entitlement to housing benefit by an independent tribunal.’

Judges:

Moses J

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 657, [2002] HRLR 2

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights, Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992, Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 81

Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347086

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 live with her husband’s brother. Her three children, all adults, wanted to come to join her. She applied for income support, which was rejected as ‘not habitually resident in the United Kingdom’.
Held: A person did not become habitually resident in the UK at the moment of arriving here. Entitlement to benefits which was dependent upon the taking up of habitual residence required first the taking up of residence here and also the passing of some period of time. ‘Habitual’ here means something beyond ‘ordinary’ residence. It was a question of fact to be assessed in each case. ‘As a matter of ordinary language a person is not habitually resident in any country unless he has taken up residence and lived there for a period.’ Appeal dismissed.
The question of what constituted residence for an appreciable period of time was a question of fact to be decided on the day when the determination had to be made on the circumstances of each case. Lord Slynn said: ‘Bringing possessions, doing everything necessary to establish residence before coming, having a right of abode, seeking to bring a family, durable ties with a country of residence or intended residence, and many other factors have been taken into account. The requisite period is not a fixed period, it may be longer, where there are doubts.’

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Steyn Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde Lord Hutton

Citations:

Times 27-Oct-1999, Gazette 03-Nov-1999, Gazette 08-Dec-1999, [1999] UKHL 41, [1999] 4 All ER 677, [1999] 1 WLR 1937

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 124, Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 (SI 1987 No 1967) Sch7 par 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 . .
Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Lysaght HL 1928
The taxpayer, who was living in Ireland would come regularly to England for a total of less than three months a year, and would spend a week or so in a hotel for the purpose of board meetings. The House considered the meaning of the requirement of . .
Cited – In re J (a Minor) (Abduction: Custody rights) HL 1-Jul-1990
On 21 March 1990 the mother removed the child, aged two, from Australia, where he had been habitually resident, to England with the intention of permanently residing here. She did so without the knowledge of the father who also resided in Australia . .
Cited – C v C (Minor:Abduction: Rights of Custody Abroad) CA 1989
The English mother married the Australian father in Australia and bore their child their. After divorce both parents had custody with no right to remove the child. The mother brought the child to England without the father’s consent.
Held: The . .
Cited – Regina v Barnet London Borough Council, Ex parte Shah HL 16-Dec-1982
The five applicants had lived in the UK for at least three years while attending school or college. All five were subject to immigration control, four had entered as students with limited leave to remain for the duration of their studies, and the . .
Cited – Kapur v Kapur FD 1984
The husband had petitioned for divorce. He came to England only in August 1981, and had only limited leave to stay. The court considered whether the court had jurisdiction.
Held: There was no significant difference for this purpose between . .
Cited – V v B (A Minor) (Abduction) 1991
The mother of a child sought return of her son to Australia. The child was born in New Zealand, then came to England and the family then went to Australia. The father brought him back to England by subterfuge. He now denied the child had any . .
Cited – Levene v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 1928
Until 1919 Mr. Levene had been both resident and ordinarily resident in the UK. Then, for five years he spent about five months (mainly in the summer) each year, staying in hotels in the UK and receiving medical attention or pursuing religious and . .
Cited – Macrae v Macrae CA 1949
The question was as to the Magistrates’ jurisdiction under the Acts, which depended upon ordinary residence: ‘Ordinary residence can be changed in a day. A man is ordinarily resident in one place up till a particular day: he then cuts the connection . .
Cited – Lewis v Lewis FD 1956
A wife returning to live in England after a period living in Australia, resumed her ordinary residence when she began her voyage by sea back to England. . .
Cited – 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.

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 – W v F FD 4-Apr-2007
Application by father for summary return of son to the USA. The mother said that the father had consented to his removal and acquiesced in his stay here.
Held: The mother had a settled intention to remain in the US when she first arrived, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.84255

Forster v Hoofddirectie van de Informatie Beheer Groep: ECJ 18 Nov 2008

Grand Chamber – Freedom of movement for persons – Student who is a national of one Member State and goes to another Member State to follow a training course – Student maintenance grant Citizenship of the Union Article 12 EC Legal certainty
The imposition under Dutch law of a requirement of five years’ prior residence in the Netherlands was held to be justified because the qualification was attainable by someone who had come to the Netherlands to study.

Judges:

V Skouris, P

Citations:

[2009] All ER (EC) 399, [2008] ECR I-8507, [2009] 1 CMLR 32, [2009] PTSR CS23, ECLI:EU:C:2008:630, [2008] EUECJ C-158/07

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 29-Jul-2015
After increasing university fees, the student loan system was part funded by the government. They introduced limits to the availability of such loans, and a student must have been lawfully ordinarily resident in the UK for three years before the day . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Education, Benefits

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.640865

Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, Student Loans Company Ltd: Admn 17 Jul 2014

Challenge to the exclusion of the Claimant from eligibility for a student loan. The claimant said that both the settlement criterion and the lawful ordinary residence criterion constituted unjustified and discriminatory restrictions on her right to education under both article 2 of the First Protocol and article 14.
Held: Her rights had been violated by the application to her of the settlement criterion but not by the application of the lawful ordinary residence criterion.

Judges:

Hayden J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 2452 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At First Instance – Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 29-Jul-2015
After increasing university fees, the student loan system was part funded by the government. They introduced limits to the availability of such loans, and a student must have been lawfully ordinarily resident in the UK for three years before the day . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Education, Benefits, Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.534429

(Un-named) (DLA): NISSCS 14 Aug 1996

Appeal by Adjudication Officer against a decision of the Disability Appeal Tribunal that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against a purported review decision which was held to be invalid.

Citations:

[1995] NISSCSC C22/95(DLA)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Benefits

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.521476

(Un-named) (HB): UTAA 1 Dec 2008

Whether a single dwelling can comprise separate properties rented under different tenancies for Housing benefit purposes. The local authority argues that it cannot. The appeal tribunal decided that it could.

Citations:

[2008] UKUT 26 (AAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.311930

Regina (Bidar) v Ealing London Borough Council and Another: ECJ 15 Mar 2005

Europa (Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union) Citizenship of the Union – Articles 12 EC and 18 EC – Assistance for students in the form of subsidised loans – Provision limiting the grant of such loans to students settled in national territory. The court considered the retrospective nature of a ruling: ‘the interpretation the Court of Justice gives to a rule of Community law is limited to clarifying and defining the meaning and scope of that rule as it ought to have been understood and applied from the time of its coming into force. It follows that the rule as thus interpreted may, and must, be applied by the courts even to legal relationships arising and established before the judgment ruling on the request for interpretation.’ However the court may limit the temporal effect of a ruling in defined circumstances: ‘The court has taken that step only in quite specific circumstances, where there was a risk of serious economic repercussions owing in particular to the large number of legal relationships entered into in good faith on the basis of rules considered to be validly in force and where it appeared that both individuals and national authorities had been led into adopting practices which did not comply with Community legislation by reason of objective, significant uncertainty regarding the implications of Community provisions, to which the conduct of other member states or the Commission may even have contributed …’
The applicant was a French national who had come to live with his grandmother in London to finish his secondary education. He was given a place at University, and applied for a student loan. He issued proceedings when his application for a student loan was refused. The matter was referred to the ECJ.
Held: The rules effectively prevented any resident student from another member state ever receiving the same benefits by way of a student loan to pursue tertiary education in England. The rules were discriminatory and unlawful. The requirement that an applicant should have lived in England for more than three years was potentially discriminatory but might be justifiable only if it was objectively based on non-discriminatory grounds and was proportionate. However the rules required also that any applicant should have settled status, and that status would be denied because it required that he be ordinarily resident without being subject to any restriction on the period of time for which he could remain. That restriction would stay in place.
Europa Citizenship of the Union – Articles 12 EC and 18 EC – Assistance for students in the form of subsidised loans – Provision limiting the grant of such loans to students settled in national territory.
It was ‘permissible for a member state to ensure that the grant of assistance to cover the maintenance costs of students from other member states does not become an unreasonable burden which could have consequences for the overall level of assistance which may be granted by that state . . In the case of assistance covering the maintenance costs of students, it is thus legitimate for a member state to grant such assistance only to students who have demonstrated a certain degree of integration into the society of that state.’
The court accepted that this justified the residence test. It also accepted that the settlement test: ‘could admittedly, like the requirement of three years’ residence referred to in the preceding paragraph, correspond to the legitimate aim of ensuring that an applicant for assistance has demonstrated a certain degree of integration into the society of that state.’

Judges:

V. Skouris, P

Citations:

Times 29-Mar-2005, C-209/03, [2005] EUECJ C-209/03, [2005] 2 WLR 1078, [2005] QB 812, [2005] All ER (EC) 687, [2005] CEC 607, [2005] ECR I-2119, [2005] 2 CMLR 3, [2005] ELR 404

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Education (Student Support) Regulations 2001

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – National Westminster Bank plc v Spectrum Plus Limited and others HL 30-Jun-2005
Former HL decision in Siebe Gorman overruled
The company had become insolvent. The bank had a debenture and claimed that its charge over the book debts had become a fixed charge. The preferential creditors said that the charge was a floating charge and that they took priority.
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 . .
Cited – Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 29-Jul-2015
After increasing university fees, the student loan system was part funded by the government. They introduced limits to the availability of such loans, and a student must have been lawfully ordinarily resident in the UK for three years before the day . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Education

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.223540

Anthony Richard Rapley And Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 4 Sep 2007

The applicants complain that British social security legislation discriminated against them on grounds of sex, in breach of Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with both Article 8 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

Judges:

Casadevall, P

Citations:

67913/01, [2007] ECHR 1171

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights, Benefits, Discrimination

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.462860

(Un-named) (IS): SSCS 18 Jun 1997

Absence from Great Britain – claimant on work experience in Belgium and France and receiving maintenance from the European Social Fund – whether in receipt of a training allowance and so not required to be available for work

Citations:

[1997] UKSSCSC CIS – 858 – 1994

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.269063

C P M Meeusen v Hoofddirectie Van De Informatie Beheer Groep Case C-337/97: ECJ 6 Oct 1999

Though M and his parents resided in Belgium, and M studied in Belgium, M’s father and mother worked in their company in the Netherlands. The Belgian refused a student grant because M’s parents did not work in Belgium. The court re-emphasised the obligations of countries not to discriminate against dependants of workers in other member states, and upheld the claim for financial support.

Citations:

Gazette 06-Oct-1999

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Benefits

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.78812

Vatsouras v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 900; Koupatantze v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 90 – C-22/08: ECJ 12 Mar 2009

ECJ (Opinion) European citizenship – Freedom of movement for persons – Concept of worker Validity of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC Resident nationals of other Member States who have become unemployed after working for a short period Right to receive social assistance benefits.

Citations:

C-22/08, [2009] EUECJ C-22/08 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2004/38/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Vatsouras v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 900; Koupatantze v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 90 C-23/08 ECJ 12-Mar-2009
ECJ (Opinion) European citizenship Freedom of movement for persons – Concept of worker Validity of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC Resident nationals of other Member States who have become unemployed after . .

Cited by:

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.
Opinion – Vatsouras v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 900; Koupatantze v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 90 – C-22/08 ECJ 4-Jun-2009
ECJ European citizenship Free movement of persons Articles 12 EC and 39 EC Directive 2004/38/EC Article 24(2) Assessment of validity Nationals of a Member State Professional activity in another Member State Level . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Benefits

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.322761

Vatsouras v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 900; Koupatantze v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 90 C-23/08: ECJ 12 Mar 2009

ECJ (Opinion) European citizenship Freedom of movement for persons – Concept of worker Validity of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC Resident nationals of other Member States who have become unemployed after working for a short period Right to receive social assistance benefits.

Citations:

C-23/08, [2009] EUECJ C-23/08 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2004/38/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

See Also – Vatsouras v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 900; Koupatantze v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 90 – C-22/08 ECJ 12-Mar-2009
ECJ (Opinion) European citizenship – Freedom of movement for persons – Concept of worker Validity of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC Resident nationals of other Member States who have become unemployed . .
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.
Opinion – Vatsouras v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 900; Koupatantze v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 90 C-23/08 ECJ 4-Jun-2009
ECJ European citizenship Free movement of persons Articles 12 EC and 39 EC Directive 2004/38/EC Article 24(2) – Assessment of validity Nationals of a Member State Professional activity in another Member State . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.322762

Murray v The United Kingdom: ECHR 3 Feb 2009

The applicant complained under Articles 8 and 14 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 that, because he was a man, he was denied social security benefits equivalent to those received by widows.

Judges:

Lech Garlicki, President

Citations:

28045/02, [2009] ECHR 192

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Human Rights, Benefits, Discrimination

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.280476

Van Der Helder And Another v College Voor Zorgverzekeringen: ECJ 10 Oct 2013

ECJ (Opinion) Social security – Sickness insurance – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Title III, Chapter 1 – Article 28(2)(b) – Pensioner entitled to benefits in kind under the legislation of two or more Member States – Legislation to which the pensioner has been subject for the longest period of time – Notion of ‘pensions’

Judges:

Wahl AG

Citations:

C-321/12, [2013] EUECJ C-321/12

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Van Der Helder And Another v College Voor Zorgverzekeringen ECJ 10-Oct-2013
ECJ Social security – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Article 28(2)(b) – Sickness insurance benefits – Entitlement to an old-age pension in several Member States – Residence in another Member State – Provision of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.516585

Gomez-Limon v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS): ECJ 4 Dec 2008

ECJ Opinion – Principle of equality of treatment of men and women in matters of social security. Calculation of the amount of an invalidity pension – Parental leave.

Citations:

C-537/07, [2008] EUECJ C-537/07 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Gomez-Limon v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS) ECJ 16-Jul-2009
ECJ Social Policy – Directive 96/34/EC – Framework agreement on parental leave – Entitlements acquired or being acquired at the start of the leave – Continued receipt of social security benefits during the leave . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Discrimination, Benefits

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278686

(Un-named) (IS): SSCS 23 Jun 1993

Housing costs – loan used to purchase bankrupt partner’s former share of property from trustee in bankruptcy – whether for the purpose of ‘acquiring an interest in the dwelling’

Citations:

[1993] UKSSCSC CIS – 569 – 1992

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.269518