The authority had to decide the age of the applicant, an asylum seeker, in order to decide whether a duty was owed to him under the Act. He complained that the procedure adopted was unfair. The 2002 Act did not apply to persons under 18, and he would be entitled to assistance from the respondent. The assessment was made by a social worker through an interpreter over a telephone, but no record was kept.
Held: There was no statutory procedure. Without documentation, no objective procedure existed, and the respondent must rely upon its own assessment. It was difficult but not complex, and should not be made complex. It had to make its own decision, and could not simply adopt the decision of the Home Office. The procedure adopted here risked misunderstanding, and notes would have been relevant and useful. The applicant had not been given opportunity to answer points found against him, and the decision was unfair and must be set aside.
The court set out guidelines for the making of such assessments.

Stanley Burnton J
[2003] EWHC 1689 (Admin), Times 18-Jul-2003, [2003] 4 All ER 280
Bailii
Children Act 1989 17, Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 18(1)(a)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – I and Another, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 27-May-2005
The applicants had sought asylum. The respondent wished to detain them. They said that they were under the age of 18, which would require them to be released. The respondent obtained expert reports from a senior consultant paediatrician experienced . .
Cited – Regina (A) v Liverpool City Council QBD 26-Jun-2007
The applicant sought judicial review of the authority’s decision that he was over the age of eighteen.
Held: Review was granted. The authority had to have regard to all the relevant information, and could not limit itself to adopting the . .
Cited – Friends of Basildon Golf Course v Basildon District Council and Another Admn 23-Jan-2009
The council owned land on which it ran a golf course. It set out to privatise it and sought interest. An application was made for planning permission. The applicants objected to the planning permission, saying that the Environmental Impact . .
Cited – A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon SC 26-Nov-2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined.
Held: The claimants’ appeals . .
Cited – AA, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 10-Jul-2013
The issue on this appeal is the effect of section 55 on the legality of the appellant’s detention under paragraph 16 over a period of 13 days. At the time of the detention the Secretary of State acted in the mistaken but reasonable belief that he . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Local Government, Benefits

Leading Case

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.184712

Regina v Manchester City Council, ex parte Stennett etc: HL 25 Jul 2002

The applicants were former mental patients who had been admitted to hospital compulsorily under section 3. On their release they were to be given support under section 117. The authorities sought to charge for these services, and appealed a decision that the services should be free.
Held: Section 117 imposed a clear and free standing duty to provide support. The section was not a mere request to the authority to provide services under other provisions. Such patients might have greater needs and also have imposed on them restrictions. It was not inappropriate that support should be free.

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Mackay of Clashfern Lord Steyn Lord Hutton Lord Millett
Times 29-Aug-2002, Gazette 17-Oct-2002, [2002] UKHL 34, [2002] BLGR 557, (2002) 5 CCL Rep 500, [2002] 4 All ER 124, [2002] 3 WLR 584, (2002) 68 BMLR 247, [2002] 2 AC 1127
House of Lords, Bailii
Mental Health Act 1983 3 117
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal From – Regina v Richmond London Borough Council, Ex Parte Watson; Regina v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, Ex Parte Armstrong etc Admn 15-Oct-1999
. .

Cited by:
Cited – K v Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust and Another QBD 30-May-2008
k_centralQBD2008
The claimant appealed against an order striking out his claim in negligence. He had leaped from a window in a suicide attempt. The accommodation was provided by the defendant whilst caring for him under the 1983 Act.
Held: The case should be . .
Cited – Stojak, Regina (on The Application of) v Sheffield City Council Admn 22-Dec-2009
The deceased had been detained as a mental patient and supported after her release, by her family financially. Her representatives now said that the respondent had failed in its obligation to provide support for no charge. The authority said that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Benefits, Local Government

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.174394

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 were inconsistent with articles 12 (discrimination on the grounds of nationality) and 18 (free movement of workers) of the Treaty, relying on Trajani.
Held: The appeal failed. Abdirahman could not be said to be per incuriam so as to allow the applicant to rely on article 12. Nor could article 18 be read to include a class or workers who had been explicitly excluded.
Maurice Kay LJ said that if a citizen of one Member State who is lawfully present in another Member State can, without difficulty and whilst economically inactive, access the social security benefits of the host State, the implications for the more prosperous Member States with more generous social security provisions are obvious. The rules that regulation 2 of the 2002 Regulations lays down are intended to meet this problem. There are various ways in which the pre-condition for entitlement can be achieved under its provisions. They are not exclusively dependent on the nationality of the persons concerned.

Sir Anthony Clarke MR, Maurice Kay LJ, Stanley Burnton LJ
[2008] EWCA Civ 1310, Times 04-Dec-2008, [2009] Eu LR 402, [2009] 2 CMLR 85, [2009] PTSR 897, [2009] 2 CMLR 3
Bailii
Income Support (General) Regulations 1987, Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2000, EU Treaty 12 18
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Abdirahman v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 5-Jul-2007
The appellants were economically inactive EEA nationals who were lawfully present in the UK and who appealed against refusal of their claims for social security benefits under Articles 12 18.
Held: The appeal failed. For Art 12, the benefits . .
Cited – Baumbast and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department ECJ 17-Sep-2002
The first applicant, his wife and her children had been granted leave to stay in the UK. At the time the leave was withdrawn the children were settled in schools, and were granted indefinite leave. The second applicant was the mother of children who . .
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 . .
Cited – Grzelczyk v Centre public d’aide sociale d’Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve ECJ 20-Sep-2001
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: Tribunal du travail de Nivelles – Belgium. Articles 6, 8 and 8a of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 12 EC, 17 EC and 18 EC) – Council Directive 93/96/EEC – . .
Cited – Trojani v Centre public d’aide sociale de Bruxelles (CPAS) ECJ 7-Sep-2004
EAT Freedom of movement of persons – Citizenship of the European Union – Right of residence – Directive 90/364/EEC – Limitations and conditions – Person working in a hostel in return for benefits in kind – . .

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.

European, Benefits

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.278300

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 closely connected with it that it constituted ‘attention’ in connection with a bodily function. The judge thought cooking was itself a bodily function.
Held: The Court took a broader view of the meaning of bodily functions than those of merely eating and excreting: ”Bodily functions’ include breathing, hearing, seeing, eating, drinking, walking, sitting, sleeping, getting in or out of bed, dressing, undressing, eliminating waste products–and the like – all of which an ordinary person–who is not suffering from any disability–does for himself.’ and ‘To my mind the word ‘functions’ in its physiological or bodily sense connotes the normal action of any organs or set of organs of the body, and so the attention must be in connection with such normal actions.’ and ‘The word ‘attention’ itself indicates something more than personal service, something involving care, consideration and vigilance for the person being attended. The very word suggests a service of a close and intimate nature. And the phrase ‘attention . . in connection with . . bodily functions’ involves some service involving personal contact carried out in the presence of the disabled person.’

Lord Denning MR
[1981] 1 WLR 1017
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – 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 . .
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 . .
Approved – In re Woodling; Woodling v Secretary of State for Social Services HL 1984
The question of law was whether cooking meals was ‘attention in connection with bodily functions’ for the purpose of attendance allowance.
Held: Though courts are willing to give ‘bodily functions’ a fairly wide meaning, it did not include the . .
Mentioned – 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 . .
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.

Benefits

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.198684

Commission v United Kingdom C-308/14: ECJ 14 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Coordination of social security systems – Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Article 4 – Equal treatment as regards access to social security benefits – Right of residence – Directive 2004/38/EC – National legislation under which child benefit and child tax credit are not granted to nationals of other Member States who do not have a right of lawful residence

[2016] WLR(D) 305, ECLI:EU:C:2016:436, [2016] EUECJ C-308/14
WLRD, Bailii
Regulation (EC) 883/2004, Directive 2004/38/EC
European

Benefits

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.565602

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 months, during which time her benefits were cancelled.
Held: The result was to leave the appellant in a Kafka-esque world where she was affected by a decision she was not told of, and which she could not challenge. The Act should be read so that the decision was deemed completed not merely when the decision was made, but also when that decision was communicated: ‘Notice of a decision is required before it can have the character of a determination with legal effect because the individual concerned must be in a position to challenge the decision in the courts if he or she wishes to do so. This is not a technical rule, it is simply an application of the right of access to justice.’ Exceptions to the need to general provide notice might be allowed in exceptional cases, perhaps in criminal matters, but otherwise it was necessary.
Lord Steyn pointed out: ‘the Convention is not an exhaustive statement of fundamental rights under our system of law. Lord Hoffmann’s dictum (in Ex p Simms) applies to fundamental rights beyond the four corners of the Convention.’

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Millett, Lord Scott of Foscote
[2003] UKHL 36, Times 27-Jun-2003, Gazette 04-Sep-2003, [2003] INLR 521, [2003] HRLR 31, [2003] Imm AR 570, [2004] 2 WLR 603, [2004] 1 AC 604, [2004] 1 All ER 833
House of Lords, Bailii
Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993, Asylum and Immigration Act 1996, Asylum Appeals (Procedure) Rules 1996, Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 (SI 1987/1967) 70(3A)(b)(i), European Convention on Human Rights
England and Wales
Citing:
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 . .
Cited – Salem v Secretary of State for Home Department CA 6-Mar-1998
The Secretary of State having decided against an application for asylum could direct non-payment of benefits although he would hear representations.
Held: Regulation 70(3A)(b)(i) defines a date by reference to the recording by the Secretary of . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security Ex Parte B and the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants CA 27-Jun-1996
The Secretary of State had introduced regulations which excluded the statutory right to payment of ‘urgent case’ benefits for asylum seekers who had not claimed asylum immediately upon arrival, or whose claims for asylum had been rejected, and who . .
Cited – Racke v Hauptzollamt Mainz (Judgment) ECJ 25-Jan-1979
A fundamental principle in the Community legal order requires that a measure adopted by the public authorities shall not be applicable to those concerned before they have the opportunity to make themselves acquainted with it. . .
Cited – Raymond v Honey HL 4-Mar-1981
The defendant prison governor had intercepted a prisoner’s letter to the Crown Office for the purpose of raising proceedings to have the governor committed for an alleged contempt of court.
Held: The governor was in contempt of court. Subject . .
At First Instance – Regina (on the Application of Anufrijeva) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another Admn 25-Oct-2001
. .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms HL 8-Jul-1999
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .

Cited by:
Cited – Lord, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 1-Sep-2003
The claimant was a category A prisoner serving a sentence of life imprisonment for murder. He sought the reasons for his categorisation as a Class A prisoner. Unhappy at the disclosure made, he sought information under the 1998 Act. It was argued . .
Cited – Ali v The Head Teacher and Governors of Lord Grey School CA 29-Mar-2004
The student had been unlawfully excluded from school. The school had not complied with the procedural requirements imposed by the Act.
Held: Though the 1996 Act placed the responsibilty for exclusion upon the local authority, the head and . .
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 – Van Colle v Hertfordshire Police QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimants claimed for the estate of their murdered son. He had been waiting to give evidence in a criminal trial, and had asked the police for support having received threats. Other witnesses had also suffered intimidation including acts of . .
Cited – Murchison v Southend Magistrates’ Court Admn 24-Jan-2006
The defendant faced an accusation of having slapped a child in the street. The child’s carer had called the police to say that she thought the complaint a practical joke. The defendant did not give evidence. The magistrates retired and came back to . .
Cited – SK, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 25-Jan-2008
The claimant was a Zimbabwean National who was to be removed from the country. He was unlawfully held in detention pending removal. He sought damages for false imprisonment. He had been held over a long period pending decisions in the courts on the . .
Cited – HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others SC 27-Jan-2010
The claimants objected to orders made freezing their assets under the 2006 Order, after being included in the Consolidated List of suspected members of terrorist organisations.
Held: The orders could not stand. Such orders were made by the . .
Cited – Medical Justice, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 26-Jul-2010
The claimant, a charity assisting immigrants and asylum seekers, challenged a policy document regulating the access to the court of failed applicants facing removal. They said that the new policy, reducing the opportunity to appeal to 72 hours or . .
Cited – Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
Cited – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SC 12-Oct-2011
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR
The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Benefits, Administrative

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.183878

London Borough of Hillingdon v SS and TS and ES (SEN) (Special Educational Needs – Special Educational Provision – Naming School or Other Institution In EHC Plan): UTAA 12 Jun 2017

[2017] UKUT 250 (AAC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.595521

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 procedurally unfair because the consultation documentation gave a misleading impression in failing to mention other ways of absorbing the shortfall in funding which the proposed scheme was intended to meet.
Lord Reid said: ‘This case is . . concerned with a statutory duty of consultation. Such duties vary greatly depending on the particular provision in question, the particular context, and the purpose for which the consultation is to be carried out. The duty may, for example, arise before or after a proposal has been decided upon; it may be obligatory or may be at the discretion of the public authority; it may be restricted to particular consultees or may involve the general public; the identity of the consultees may be prescribed or may be left to the discretion of the public authority; the consultation may take the form of seeking views in writing, or holding public meetings; and so on and so forth. The content of a duty to consult can therefore vary greatly from one statutory context to another: ‘the nature and the object of consultation must be related to the circumstances which call for it’ . . Meaningful public participation in this particular decision-making process, in a context with which the general public cannot be expected to be familiar, requires that the consultees should be provided not only with information about the draft scheme, but also with an outline of the realistic alternatives, and an indication of the main reasons for the authority’s adoption of the draft scheme.’

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed
[2014] UKSC 56, [2014] WLR(D) 486, [2014] 1 WLR 3947, UKSC 2013/0116, [2014] LGR 823, [2015] 1 All ER 495, [2014] PTSR 1317
Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC Summary, SC
Welfare Reform Act 2012
England and Wales
Citing:
At first instance – 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 – Regina v Brent London Borough Council ex parte Gunning 1985
The demands of fair consultation procedures will vary from case to case and will depend on the factors involved. The requirements are: ‘First, that consultation must be at a time when proposals are still at a formative stage. Second, that the . .
Cited – Baker, Regina (on the Application of) v Devon County Council CA 21-Dec-1992
The plaintiffs appealed against orders dismissing claims for judicial review. They had challenged the intended closure of residential homes for old people. The plaintiffs said that there had been inadequate consultation, and the Councils argued that . .
Cited – Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor CA 16-Jul-1999
Consultation to be Early and Real Listening
The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were . .
Cited – Birkett v Acorn Business Machines Limited CA 16-Jul-1999
The parties had entered into a contract, which both knew was to be used to defraud a third party finance company. When one sued the other for breach, the court refused to order the contract to be enforced when he became aware of the fraud.
Cited – Osborn v The Parole Board SC 9-Oct-2013
Three prisoners raised questions as to the circumstances in which the Parole Board is required to hold an oral hearing before making an adverse decision. One of the appeals (Osborn) concerned a determinate sentence prisoner who was released on . .
Cited – Salat v Barutis CA 20-Nov-2013
The claimant had been knocked from his motor cyle by the defendant. He hired a replacement, but when he sought payment of the associated hire charges, the defendant said that the hire company had failed to comply with the 208 Regulations, and that . .
Cited – Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust v Joint Committee of Primary Care Trusts and Another Admn 7-Nov-2011
The claimant, the Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust sought to quash as flawed and unlawful a consultation by the first defendant concerning the reconfiguration of paediatric congenital cardiac services (PCCS) in England. . .
Cited – Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, Regina (on The Application of) v Joint Committee of Primary Care Trusts and Another CA 19-Apr-2012
The defendant appealed against a finding that its consultation over the rationalisation of pediatric cardiac surgical facilities had been defective and unlawful. . .
Cited – Fletcher v Minister of Town and Country Planning 1947
A local authority being consulted about the government’s proposed designation of Stevenage as a ‘new town’ would be likely to be able to respond satisfactorily to a presentation of less specificity than would members of the public, particularly . .
Cited – Nichol v Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council CA 1988
Gateshead, confronted by a falling birth rate and therefore an inability to sustain a viable sixth form in all its secondary schools, decided to set up sixth form colleges instead. Local parents had failed to establish that Gateshead’s prior . .
Cited – The Mayor and Corporation of Port Louis v The Honourable Attorney General of Mauritiuis PC 27-Apr-1965
Meaningful public participation in a decision-making process, in a context with which the general public cannot be expected to be familiar, requires that the consultees should be provided not only with information about the draft scheme, but also . .
Cited – Medway Council and Kent County Council, Essex County Council, Mead; Fossett v Secretary of State for Transport Admn 26-Nov-2002
. .
Cited – BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another CA 9-Nov-2007
The action group appealed against refusal of a judicial review of guidelines as to the employment of non-EU doctors, saying that they were in effect immigration rules and issuable only under the 1971 Act. The court had said that since the guidance . .

Cited by:
Cited – Robson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Salford City Council CA 20-Jan-2015
The appellants, all severely disabled appealed against the refusal of their judicial review of the substantial withdrawal by the Council of a service providing them with transport to local day care facilities. They said that the council had failed . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Benefits

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.538151

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Hughes (A Minor): CA 15 Jan 2004

[2004] EWCA Civ 16
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Perkins and Another CA 17-Nov-2004
Mr Perkins was aged 87 years, and claimed housing benefit on the basis that his income was below the applicable level. His son sent him money regularly from Australia. He appealed refusal of benefit.
Held: The claimant maintained two accounts. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.194127

RF v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 21 Dec 2017

Psychlogical condition no bar to benefits claim

The claimant challenged the exclusion of psychological distress as a ground for payment of certain personal Independence Payments.
Held: The claim was allowed. This was direct discrimination which was not objectively justified.

Mostyn J
[2017] EWHC 3375 (Admin), [2017] WLR(D) 861, [2018] PTSR 1147
Bailii, WLRD
Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) (Amendment) Regulations 2017 2(4), European Convention on Human Rights 14
England and Wales

Health, Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.602595

Regina v Lancaster: CACD 2 Mar 2010

Whether Ommission Significant on Benefits Claim

The defendant appealed against his conviction for false accounting. He had been claiming council tax benefit and housing benefit, but had failed to notify the council of a change in his circumstances.
Held: The appeal failed. The court considered that the phrase ‘omits a material particular’ in the section referred to an omisssion where the resulting document could mislead in a way which was significant, and ‘Whether the omission is significant will depend on the nature of the document and the context. The test is objective, although it would not be helpful to the jury to use that term. A less lawyerish way of expressing it is to say that it is for the jury to judge for themselves, on the particular facts of the case, whether they regard the omission as significant.’

Lord Justice Toulson, Mr Justice Cox and Judge Barker, QC
[2010] EWCA Crim 370, [2010] WLR (D) 63, [2010] Crim LR 776, [2010] 3 All ER 402, [2010] 2 Cr App R 7, [2010] 1 WLR 2558, [2010] HLR 40
Bailii, Times, WLRD
Theft Act 1968 17
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Mallett CACD 1978
The defendant car dealer had made out and used a hire-purchase agreement form which falsely stated that the hirer had been a company director for a named company for several years. Relying on the information, a finance company financed the . .
Cited – Osinuga v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 26-Nov-1997
False information which was provided in a Housing Benefit application form would be used in accounting and constitutes false accounting. . .
Distinguished – Passmore, Regina v CACD 18-Jun-2007
P was claiming housing and council tax benefit. He had been convicted of dishonestly failing to give prompt notification of ‘a change of circumstances affecting any entitlement of his to any benefit or other payment or advantage under the relevant . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Benefits

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.401976