Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  















Benefits - From: 1930 To: 1959

This page lists 2 cases, and was prepared on 03 April 2018.

 
Irving v Minister of Pensions 1945 SC 31
1945
SCS
Lord Justice Clerk Cooper
Scotland, Evidence, Benefits
Appeals were against decisions of Pensions Appeal Tribunals relating to claims for pensions in respect of death or disablement by war injuries. Article 4(1) of the Royal Warrant concerning Retired Pay, Pensions, etc dated December 1943 (Cmd 6489) provided that in no case was there to be an onus on any claimant to prove that the disablement or death of a member of the military forces was attributable to or aggravated by war service and that the benefit of any reasonable doubt should be given to the claimant: "In every issue of disputed facts between two parties, the onus of proof must inevitably be either on the one hand or the other, and the result of the provisions I have quoted is that the onus of proof is on the Minister."
1 Citers


 
Regina v Medical Appeal Tribunal (North Midland Region), Ex parte Hubble [1958] 2 QB 228; [1958] 2 All ER 374
1958

Diplock J
Benefits, Administrative
The claimant sought to receive money out of insurance funds fed by contributions from all employers, insured persons and the Exchequer. The procedure for determining whether the claimant is entitled to a disability benefit was said to be more like an inquest than an action.
Diplock J said: "A claim by an insured person to benefit under the Act is not truly analogous to a lis inter partes. A claim to benefit is a claim to receive money out of the insurance funds . . Any such claim requires investigation to determine whether any, and if so, what amount of benefit is payable out of the fund. In such an investigation, the minister or the insurance officer is not a party adverse to the claimant. If analogy be sought in the other branches of the law, it is to be found in an inquest rather than in an action."
1 Citers


 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.