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.’
Sir Thayne Forbes
 EWHC 2221 (Admin),  PTSR 1785, (2009) 12 CCL Rep 654
Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit (Consequential Provisions) Regulations 2006 Sch 3 4(10)
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. . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 February 2021; Ref: scu.374383