Category: Benefits

M and S, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Haringey: Admn 7 Feb 2013

The claimants challenged changes to the system of housing benefits.
Held: The claims were dismissed.

Judges:

Underhill J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 252 (Admin), [2013] ACD 62

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Welfare Reform Act 2012

Cited by:

Appeal from – Stirling, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Haringey CA 22-Feb-2013
The applicant sought judicial review of the approach taken by the respondent to the Council Tax reduction scheme, following the abolition of Council Tax Benefit. They now appealed against rejection of that challenge.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
At first instance – Moseley, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Haringey SC 29-Oct-2014
Consultation requirements
The claimant challenged a decision of the respondent reducing the benefits under the Council Tax Reduction Scheme reducing Council Tax for those in need, saying that the Council’s consultation had been inadequate.
Held: The consultation was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471236

Patricia Dumont De Chassart v Office National D’Allocations Familiales Pour Travailleurs Salaries: ECJ 21 Feb 2013

ECJ Social security – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Articles 72, 78(2)(b) and 79(1)(a) – Family benefits for orphans – Aggregation of periods of insurance and employment – Periods completed by the surviving parent in another Member State – Not taken into account

Judges:

Ilesic P

Citations:

C-619/11, [2013] EUECJ C-619/11

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71

European, Benefits

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471217

Stirling, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Haringey: CA 22 Feb 2013

The applicant sought judicial review of the approach taken by the respondent to the Council Tax reduction scheme, following the abolition of Council Tax Benefit. They now appealed against rejection of that challenge.
Held: The appeal failed. There is no general requirement that a consultation must present information about options that it has already been decided not to entertain.

Judges:

Sir Terence Etherton Ch, Sullivan, Pitchford LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 116, [2013] PTSR 1285

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Welfare Reform Act 2012

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – M and S, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Haringey Admn 7-Feb-2013
The claimants challenged changes to the system of housing benefits.
Held: The claims were dismissed. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Admn 11-Jun-2013
The claimant, displaced from the Chagos Archipelago, challenged a decision by the respondent to create a no-take Marine Protected Area arround the island which would make life there impossible if he and others returned. The respondent renewed his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Benefits, Administrative

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471165

MB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 5 Jul 2016

The court was asked about the age at which entitlement to a pension began for someone of transgender.
Held: The court was divided, and the issue was referred to the European Court of Justice.

Judges:

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Toulson, Lord Hodge

Citations:

[2016] UKSC 53, UKSC 2014/0220

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary

Statutes:

Council Directive 79/7/EEC, Gender Recognition Act 2004, Civil Partnership Act 2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Goodwin v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jul-2002
The claimant was a post operative male to female trans-sexual. She claimed that her human rights were infringed when she was still treated as a man for National Insurance contributions purposes, where she continued to make payments after the age at . .
Cited – P v S and Cornwall County Council ECJ 30-Apr-1996
An employee at an educational establishment told management that he intended to undergo gender reassignment. He was given notice of dismissal.
Held: The scope of the Directive was not confined to discrimination based on the fact that a person . .
At CA – MB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 31-Jul-2014
The appellant, a male to female transsexual, had remained married to her wife despite having the right to have the marriage annulled following the 2004 Act. She now appealed against rejection of her claim to a state pension on attaining the age of . .
Cited – Richards v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Social Policy) ECJ 27-Apr-2006
Ms Richards, previously a married male, had undergone gender re-assignment surgery. She remained married thereafter. Ms Richards applied to the DWP for a pension from the age of 60. That was refused by the Secretary of State for the Department of . .
Cited – Parry v United Kingdom ECHR 28-Nov-2006
. .
Cited – Hamalainen v Finland ECHR 16-Jul-2014
Grand Chamber . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Discrimination, Benefits

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.570158

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v LT (DLA): UTAA 19 Jul 2012

Disability Living Allowance – Appeal allowed – The respondent remained entitled to receive the care component of disability living allowance following her permanent move to Spain on 5 November 2002. The decision of 8 January 2007 under appeal, purporting to supersede and terminate her previous indefinite award from 6 November 2002, is set aside as ineffective.

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 282 (AAC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) No 1408/71

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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. . .
At UTAA – 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, European

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.466756

Yarce (Adequate Maintenance: Benefits) Colombia: UTIAC 30 Nov 2012

UTIAC 1. The requirement to show that a person or persons can be maintained (or will maintain themselves) ‘adequately’ without recourse to public funds has long been a requirement of the immigration rules. It continues to be a requirement for various categories of person in the amended rules that came into force in July 2012. In order to establish that maintenance is ‘adequate’ under the rules as in force before 9 July 2012, an applicant needs to show that the resources available will meet or exceed the relevant income support level set by the United Kingdom government (KA (Pakistan) [2006] UKAIT 00065). A similar requirement is to be found in the definitions of ‘adequate’ and ‘adequately’ in paragraph 6 of the rules as amended in July 2012.
2. In calculating the level of resources that will be available to the applicant and any relevant family members, after the claimant’s hypothetical arrival in the United Kingdom, it may be necessary to consider the effect on such a member’s entitlement to benefits of income and/or capital.
3. Income support is a means-tested benefit. The general rule is that all income, including that from other social security benefits, is to be taken into account when calculating an individual’s entitlement to income support, unless a specific ‘disregard’ applies. A list of disregards is to be found in Schedule 9 to the Income Support (General) Regulations 1987. They include ‘voluntary payments’. For the purposes of the 1987 Regulations, a voluntary payment is a payment by a third party, without anything being obtained in return, tangible or otherwise (R v Doncaster Borough Council ex parte Boulton [1993] 25 HLR 195; R(H) 5/05).
4. Access to capital may have an effect upon a person’s means tested benefits, provided that the person concerned has a beneficial interest in the capital. At present, a person is not entitled to income support if he or she has such an interest in capital over andpound;16,000 (regulation 45 of the 1987 Regulations). Capital of less than andpound;6,000 has no effect on entitlement to income support. Capital of between andpound;6,000 and andpound;16,000 causes weekly income support to be reduced by andpound;1 for every andpound;250 or part of such capital (regulation 53).
5. If a person is given money in order for it to be used for a particular purpose and on condition that the money must be returned if not used for that purpose, then the money will be regarded as being held on trust by that person for that purpose and, if the purpose fails, on a resulting trust for the payer. It will accordingly, at least in general, not be treated as the person’s capital, since he or she has no beneficial interest in it (Barclays Bank Limited v Quistclose Investments Limited [1970] AC 567).
6. In considering the above matters in an immigration appeal, it is important to bear in mind (a) that the appellant carries the legal burden of proving that he or she meets the relevant requirements of the immigration rules; and (b) in the light of [19] of Mahad [2009] UKSC 16, any case that depends for its success upon a third party’s voluntary payment will need to be scrutinised with particular care. Much will turn on the credibility of the appellant, sponsor and third party, both generally and as to the specifics of the actual payments. The same is true in relation to any assertion that income paid to or capital or other sums held by a sponsor who is in receipt of benefits are to be treated as being subject to ‘Quistclose’ trusts. A specific decision in an individual’s favour by the Department for Work and Pensions (‘DWP’) will normally be determinative, unless it can be shown the DWP was materially misled. Conversely, the mere absence of an adverse DWP decision will not usually take the appellant’s case materially forward.
7. Because these issues involve mixed fact and law, an appellant in an immigration appeal must be able to demonstrate, either that the actual financial position, on arrival, will be such as to make it unnecessary to rely on benefits in order to provide a standard of living equivalent to that available on means tested benefits; or that the relevant law bears on the circumstances of the family in such a way that there will be no additional recourse to public funds in so relying.

Judges:

Storey, Peter Lane, Ward LJJ

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 425 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Benefits

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.466468

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 on the basis that she was not a ‘worker’, and she now appealed.
Held: Neither side of the argument was acte clair, and accordingly the case was referred to the European Court of Justice.
Lady Hale said: ‘Pregnancy is not just a lifestyle choice. Equal treatment encompasses the reasonable response of a working woman to the physical demands and limitations of late pregnancy and childbirth. UK law gives sensible recognition to these, not only for the sake of the mother but also for the sake of her child, by not requiring that she seek or be available for work from 11 weeks before the expected date of confinement until 15 weeks after her pregnancy has ended (whether with a live or a still birth). Excluding a woman who makes that choice from the right of residence which she would have retained had she not become pregnant is, it is argued, direct discrimination on grounds of sex.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed

Citations:

[2012] UKSC 49, UKSC 2011/0176

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC Summary, SC

Statutes:

Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and Council on the rights of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – JS v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 13-Jul-2011
The claimant, a French woman and qualified teacher, now appealed against rejection of her claim for income support, saying that the defendant had failed to comply with the obligations of the European Citizens Directive designed to allow European . .
Cited – DM Levin v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie ECJ 23-Mar-1982
ECJ The concepts of ‘worker’ and ‘activity as an employed person’ define the field of application of one of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty and, as such, may not be interpreted restrictively.
Cited – Kempf v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie ECJ 3-Jun-1986
The term ‘worker’ when used within community legislation should not be interpreted restrictively. . .
Cited – Sylvie Lair v Universitat Hannover ECJ 21-Jun-1988
European law draws a distinction between member state nationals who have not yet entered into an employment relationship in the host member state where they are looking for work and those who are already working in that state or who, having worked . .
Cited – Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Antonissen ECJ 26-Feb-1991
ECJ The free movement of workers enshrined in Article 48 of the Treaty entails the right for nationals of Member States to move freely within the territory of the other Member States and to stay there for the . .
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 . .
Cited – Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh, ex parte Secretary of State for the Home Department ECJ 7-Jul-1992
ECJ The provisions of the Treaty relating to the free movement of persons are intended to facilitate the pursuit by Community citizens of occupational activities of all kinds throughout the Community and preclude . .
Cited – Ninni-Orasche v Bundesminister fur Wissenschaft, Verkehr und Kunst ECJ 6-Nov-2003
ECJ Freedom of movement for workers – Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC) – Concept of worker – Contract of employment of a short term fixed in advance – Retention of the status of . .
Cited – Georgios Orfanopoulos and Others v Land Baden-Wurttemberg. ECJ 29-Apr-2004
When considering a claim to resist deportation ‘the requirement of the existence of a present threat must, as a general rule, be satisfied at the time of the expulsion.’
Europa On the interpretation of . .
Cited – Metock And Others v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform ECJ 25-Jul-2008
ECJ Directive 2004/38/EC – Right of Union citizens and their family members to move and reside freely in the territory of a Member State – Family members who are nationals of non-member countries – Nationals of . .
At Upper Tribunal – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v JS UTAA 7-May-2010
The claimant french woman had come to England, working as a teaching assistant. She set out to train as a teacher but became pregnant, and gave up work temporarily. She was refused Income Support. Her appeal was allowed, and the Secretary of State . .
Cited – Johnson v Chief Adjudication Officer ECJ 11-Jul-1991
ECJ 1. Article 2 of Council Directive 79/7/EEC, on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security, must be interpreted as meaning that 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 – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Employment, Benefits

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.465470

Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security ex parte Cullen; Secretary of State for Social Security and Chief Adjudication Officer v Nelson: CA 8 May 1997

The Secretary of State had a discretion, but no duty, to include an attendance allowance claim in a claim for income support. There was no requirement on him to allow backdating.

Citations:

Times 16-May-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1651

Statutes:

Social Security Act 1975 80

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.142047

Chief Adjudication Officer v Patterson; Same v Dickinson: CA 11 Jun 1997

Delay in disablement assessments is not a good cause for the extension of time for award of reduced earnings allowance.

Citations:

Times 10-Jul-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1830

Statutes:

Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987/1968 R19(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Chief Adjudication Officer v Dickinson Chief Adjudication Officer v Patterson SSCS 11-Jun-1997
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.79044

Sanneh and Others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 10 Feb 2015

The appeals concerned the question of whether ‘Zambrano carers’, who are non-EU citizens responsible for the care of an EU citizen child, are entitled to social assistance (that is, non-contributory welfare benefits) on the same basis as EU citizens lawfully resident here. Currently, Zambrano carers who are in need and unable to work receive benefits on a different and less generous basis, namely that on which social assistance is granted to third country nationals to whom the UK has not given unconditional leave to enter the UK or remain (i.e. leave without a restriction on access to public funds).

Judges:

Arden, Elias, Burnett LJJ

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 49, [2015] 3 WLR 1867, [2016] QB 455, [2015] 2 CMLR 27, [2015] HLR 27, [2015] Imm AR 669, [2015] WLR(D) 61, (2015) 18 CCL Rep 5

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Sanneh, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 30-Apr-2012
Challenge to payment of Zambrano Income Support . .
Cited – Ruiz Zambrano (European Citizenship) ECJ 8-Mar-2011
ECJ Citizenship of the Union – Article 20 TFEU – Grant of right of residence under European Union law to a minor child on the territory of the Member State of which that child is a national, irrespective of the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – HC, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 15-Nov-2017
This appeal concerns the rights of so-called ‘Zambrano carers’ and their children to financial support from the state. The appellant, an Algerian national married and had children here, but was refused housing after the break up the marriage. HC . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Benefits

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.542442

Format Urzadzenia I Montaze Przemyslowe Sp. Z O.O. v Zaklad Ubezpieczen Spolecznych I Oddzial W Warszawie: ECJ 4 Oct 2012

ECJ Social security – Determination of the legislation applicable – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Article 14(2)(b) – Person normally employed in the territory of two or more Member States – Successive employment contracts – Employer established in the Member State of habitual residence of the worker – Employment performed exclusively in other Member States

Judges:

JN Cunha Rodrigues, P

Citations:

C-115/11, [2012] EUECJ C-115/11

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 14(2)(b)

European, Benefits

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.464804

Gonzalez v Instituto Nacional De La Seguridad Social and Tesoreria General De La Seguridad Social: ECJ 13 Sep 2012

ECJ Opinion – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Old-age pension – Calculation of benefits

Judges:

Mazak AG

Citations:

C-282/11, [2012] EUECJ C-282/11

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71

Cited by:

Opinion – Gonzalez v Instituto Nacional De La Seguridad Social and Tesoreria General De La Seguridad Social ECJ 21-Feb-2013
ECJ Article 48 TFEU – Social security for migrant workers – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and (EC) No 883/2004 – Old-age and survivor’s insurance – Special provisions for the application of national legislation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Benefits

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.464444

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 test could be laid down, and each case is to be considered individually. The appeal court, having seen al the evidence was in a position to judge the situation just as much as was the judge at first instance. The conclusion reached did not follow from the evidence, and was set aside. It was not possible to find inhuman or degrading treatment in the circumstances of this case.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy Lord Justice Sedley Lord Justice Peter Gibson

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1285, Times 09-Oct-2003, (2003) 7 CCLR 53

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

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

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Westminster City Council and others ex parte M, P, A and X CA 1997
Destitute asylum-seekers could derive benefit from section 21.
Held: ‘The destitute condition to which asylum-seekers can be reduced as a result of the 1996 Act coupled with the period of time which, despite the Secretary of State’s best . .
Cited – Regina v Wandsworth London Borough Council, Ex Parte O; Leicester City Council, Ex Parte Bhikha CA 7-Sep-2000
The applicants were immigrants awaiting determination of their applications for exceptional leave to remain, and who came to suffer from serious illness. Each applied for and was refused assistance from their local authority.
Held: The . .
Cited – O’Rourke v United Kingdom ECHR 26-Jun-2001
The applicant was a sex offender who on release from prison had found temporary accommodation from which he had been evicted for pestering female residents. He ignored advice to go to a night shelter whilst a decision on permanent re-housing was . .
Cited – East African Asians v United Kingdom ECHR 1973
(Commission) A group of Asian men, United Kingdom citizens, complained that, among other things, their Article 8 rights to respect for family life were infringed when they were refused permission to enter the United Kingdom to join their wives. The . .
Cited – Lorse and Others v The Netherlands ECHR 4-Feb-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 3 with regard to the first applicant ; No violation of Art. 3 with regard to the other applicants ; No violation of Art. 8 ; No violation of Art. 13 . .
Applied – 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:

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

Immigration, Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.186380

Reilly and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 6 Aug 2012

The claimants sought judicial review of schemes which they said appeared to require them to work for free in order to claim Jobseekers Allowance.
Held: Judicial review was granted. There had been a breach of regulation 4(2) of the 2011 Regulations, because the Secretary of State had breached regulation 4(2), by the failure to provide any written notice to Miss Reilly (such breach being admitted), and regulation 4(2)(e), by failing to provide ‘information about the consequences of failing to participate in the Scheme’ to Mr Wilson. The consequence of the breach of regulation 4 was that no sanctions could be lawfully imposed on Miss Reilly or Mr Wilson for failure to participate in the scheme, but the failure did not make it unlawful for the Secretary of State to require an individual to participate in either scheme.

Judges:

Foskett J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2292 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Jobseeker’s Allowance (Employment, Skills and Enterprise Scheme) Regulations 2011 4(2)

Cited by:

Appeal from – Reilly and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 12-Feb-2013
The claimants complained of the system where they were obliged to work for free to claim Jobseekers Allowance.
Held: The 2011 Regulations were required to specify the schemes under which the claimants were to claim. Instead, the regulations . .
At First Instance – Reilly and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 30-Oct-2013
The Secretary of State appealed against the decision in favour of Ms Reilly and Mr Wilson, that the 2011 Regulations, made under section 17A of the 1995 Act, did not comply with the requirements of that section, and (ii) a cross-appeal brought by . .
See Also – Reilly (No 2) and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 4-Jul-2014
The Claimants sought a declaration of incompatibility, under section 4 of HRA 1998, on the ground that the 2013 Act was incompatible with their rights under Article 6 and Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463502

Sanneh, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 30 Apr 2012

Challenge to payment of Zambrano Income Support

Judges:

Purle HHJ

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1840 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ruiz Zambrano (European Citizenship) ECJ 8-Mar-2011
ECJ Citizenship of the Union – Article 20 TFEU – Grant of right of residence under European Union law to a minor child on the territory of the Member State of which that child is a national, irrespective of the . .
Cited – Dereci and Others (European Citizenship) ECJ 15-Nov-2011
ECJ Grand Chamber – Citizenship of the Union – Right of residence of nationals of third countries who are family members of Union citizens – Refusal based on the citizen’s failure to exercise the right to freedom . .

Cited by:

See Also – Sanneh, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Another Admn 10-Apr-2013
. .
Appeal from – Sanneh and Others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 10-Feb-2015
The appeals concerned the question of whether ‘Zambrano carers’, who are non-EU citizens responsible for the care of an EU citizen child, are entitled to social assistance (that is, non-contributory welfare benefits) on the same basis as EU citizens . .
At Admn – HC, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 15-Nov-2017
This appeal concerns the rights of so-called ‘Zambrano carers’ and their children to financial support from the state. The appellant, an Algerian national married and had children here, but was refused housing after the break up the marriage. HC . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.462295

Regina (on the Application of Anufrijeva) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: Admn 25 Oct 2001

Judges:

Sir Christopher Bellamy QC

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 895

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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 . .
At First Instance – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Benefits

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.167250

Landkreis Sudliche Weinstraasse (Judgment): ECJ 2 Apr 2020

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom of movement for workers – Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 – Children of frontier workers – Social benefits – System of reimbursement of school transport costs – Condition of residence in a Land – Exclusion of children attending school in that Land and residing in a Member State other than that of the school attended – Exclusion of nationals residing in the other Lander

Citations:

C-830/18, [2020] EUECJ C-830/18

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.660140

Spence v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 23 Mar 2012

FTTTx Statutory sick pay – entitlement depending on ‘normal weekly earnings’ reaching NIC lower earnings limit – errors on one of two relevant payslips, supposedly corrected on the other – whether only the earnings actually paid during relevant period should be taken into account – not certain, but in present case yes – whilst in some cases the Tribunal might have power to substitute its view of the correct figure, this was not such a case – and even if it did so, ‘normal weekly earnings’ would still be below the NIC lower earnings limit – sections 151, 153 and 162(2) to (4) and Schedule XI Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 and regulations 17 and 19 of Statutory Sick Pay (General) Regulations 1982 considered – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2012] UKFTT 213 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, Employment

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.462641

Kroen v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax – High Income Child Benefit Charge): FTTTx 24 Feb 2020

Income tax – high income child benefit charge – hearing of objection to granting permission to make late appeal to Tribunal – was appeal notified on time to HMRC? – yes – was a review offered to, or requested by, appellant? – no – s49D TMA 1970 applied – held: appeal was not notified to Tribunal late’

Citations:

[2020] UKFTT 111 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Benefits

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.649198

Hudzinski v Agentur fur Arbeit Wesel – Familienkasse: ECJ 16 Feb 2012

ECJ Social security – Child benefit – Articles 14(1)(a) and 14a(1)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Temporary work in another Member State – Legislation applicable – Right of a Member State other than the competent State to grant child benefit

Citations:

C-611/10, [2012] EUECJ C-611/10, [2011] EUECJ C-611/10

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Cited by:

See Also – Hudzinski v Agentur fur Arbeit Wesel – Familienkasse ECJ 12-Jun-2012
ECJ Social security for migrant workers – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Articles 14(1)(a) and 14a(1)(a) – Articles 45 TFEU and 48 TFEU – Temporary work in a Member State other than that in which work is normally . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Benefits

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.460412