Tag: Benefits

LE: UTAA 24 Aug 2009

The decision of the appeal tribunal held on 2 November 2007 is erroneous in point of law. I set aside that decision. I re-make that decision pursuant to s.12(2) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The claimant is not entitled to contribution based Jobseeker’s Allowance in respect of the claim made on 23 November 2007.

Citations:

[2009] UKUT 166 (AAC)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority and Another ECJ 27-Oct-1993
Discrimination – Shifting Burden of Proof
(Preliminary Ruling) A woman was employed as a speech therapist by the health authority. She complained of sex discrimination saying that at her level of seniority within the NHS, members of her profession which was overwhelmingly a female . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.433371

Landtova (Social Security For Migrant Workers): ECJ 3 Mar 2011

ECJ Freedom of movement for workers – Social security – Regulation No 1408/71 – Convention on Social Security concluded between Member States before their accession to the European Union – Provision of Old Age – Member State competent to assess the contribution periods completed – Double take into account a period of assessment – Article 39 EC – Non-discrimination on grounds of nationality and residence – Repair of discrimination.

Citations:

C-399/09, [2011] EUECJ C-399/09

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430340

Grogan, Regina (on the Application of) v Bexley NHS Care Trust and others: Admn 25 Jan 2006

The claimant was elderly and in need of care in a nursing home. She claimed that her care needs had been assessed by an unlawful protocol applied by the health authority. She said that she qualified under the criteria for Continuing Health Care.
Held: The question for the court was whether in carrying out its assessment the Defendant had taken a lawful approach in, and by applying, its criteria, and whether it did not apply the primary health need approach. The criteria used were flawed as alleged.

Judges:

Charles J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 44 (Admin), [2006] LGR 491

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Health Service Act 1977 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 – Regina v North Derbyshire Health Authority ex parte Kenneth Graeme Fisher Admn 11-Jul-1997
The court considered the duty of the authority to take account of guidance issued by the Secretary of State: ‘If the circular provided no more than guidance, albeit in strong terms, then the only duty placed upon health authorities was to take it . .

Cited by:

Cited – Green, Regina (on the Application of) v South West Strategic Health Authority Admn 28-Oct-2008
The claimant said that whilst resident in a care home, her care should have been paid for as health care under ‘Continuing Health Care.’ She said that the decision maker had failed to comply with the Health Authorities guidelines.
Held: In . .
Cited – Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others SC 2-Aug-2017
The court was asked who is legally responsible for paying for the work done by registered nurses in social rather than health care settings. Is the National Health Service responsible for all the work they do or are the social care funders . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Benefits, Local Government

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.238156

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 were awaiting appeal.
Held: Leaving asylum applicants without benefits defeated the purpose of the asylum laws. The Regulations were quashed. Parliament cannot have intended a significant number of genuine asylum seekers to be impaled on the horns of so intolerable a dilemma: the need either to abandon their claims to refugee status, or alternatively to maintain them as best they can but in a state of utter destitution. Non-asylum-seeking immigrants had since 1980 invariably been admitted subject to the condition of ‘no recourse to public funds’ and, more importantly, unlike asylum seekers, can in any event return to their country of origin.

Judges:

Neill LJ, Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

Gazette 12-Sep-1996, Times 27-Jun-1996, [1997] 1 WLR 275, [1996] 4 All ER 385, [1996] EWCA Civ 1293

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 21, Social Security (Persons from Abroad) Regulations 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the Application of Husain) v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 5-Oct-2001
New regulations created a system under which applicants for asylum could be deprived of all benefits on the decision of an asylum support adjudicator. That person was appointed by the Home Secretary, and it was alleged was not impartial. It was . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte F S Salem Admn 11-Dec-1997
The applicant sought judicial review of a decision refusing him asylum. The decision had been made and his benefits stopped, but he was not given any detail of the notice for several months.
Held: The decision did appear to have been made and . .
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 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 . .
Cited – Regina v Westminster City Council ex parte A, London Borough of Lambeth ex parte X and similar CA 17-Feb-1997
This was an appeal from orders of certiorari quashing the decisions of three local authorities refusing to provide accommodation for the respondents, four asylum seekers, whose applications for asylum were presently being considered by the Secretary . .
Cited – K v London Borough of Lambeth CA 31-Jul-2003
The claimant appealed against refusal of judicial review. She had entered the UK, and applied for asylum. She was then found to have contracted a marriage of convenience, and thus become ineligible for support. She appealed and now sought housing . .
Cited – Kola and Another v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 28-Nov-2007
The claimant said that the 1987 Regulations were invalid, in making invalid any claim for benefits by an asylum seeker who had not made his application exactly upon entry to the UK.
Held: The appeals were allowed. Section 11 of the 1971 Act is . .
Cited – M, Regina (on the Application of) v Slough Borough Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local social services authority is obliged, under section 21(1)(a) of the 1948 Act, to arrange (and pay for) residential accommodation for a person subject to immigration control who is HIV positive but whose only . .
Cited – Unison, Regina (on The Application of) v Lord Chancellor SC 26-Jul-2017
The union appellant challenged the validity of the imposition of fees on those seeking to lay complaints in the Employment Tribunal system.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The fees were discriminatory and restricted access to justice.
The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Immigration

Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.87771

da Silva Martins v Bank Betriebskrankenkasse-Pflegekasse (Free Movement Of Persons): ECJ 13 Jan 2011

ECJ (Opinion) Social security – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Sickness benefit – Former migrant worker who has acquired a right in the State of employment to cover the risk of dependence on compulsory affiliation – Return to the State of origin – Absence of coverage of the risk of dependency in the State of origin – Possibility of maintaining, on an optional basis, affiliation to the long-term care insurance scheme in the former State of employment And to obtain the payment of the dependency allowance in the State of origin
The Court observed that benefits relating to the risk of reliance on care, unlike sickness benefits, were not intended to be paid on a short term basis and might, in the detail of their application, display characteristics resembling invalidity and old age benefits.

Citations:

C-388/09, [2011] EUECJ C-388/09

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – 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

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.428017

Tilianu, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 8 Dec 2010

The court was asked ‘whether an EU citizen who is no longer a self-employed person retains the status of worker or self-employed person in the circumstances described in sub-paragraphs (b) and (c) of article 7(3) [of Directive 2004/38] by virtue of his previous employment as a self-employed person.’

Judges:

Sedley, Moore-Bick, Elias LLJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1397, [2011] PTSR 781, [2011] Eu LR 397, [2011] 2 CMLR 12

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, European

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426906

KM, Regina (on The Application of) v Cambridgeshire County Council: Admn 26 Nov 2010

The claimant sought leave to bring judicial review of the decision of the Respondent as to the amount attributable to his care package.
Held: Leave was refused.

Judges:

Bidder QC J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3065 (Admin), (2011) 14 CCL Rep 83

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 2(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – KM, Regina (on The Application of) v Cambridgeshire County Council CA 9-Jun-2011
The claimant was a severely disabled adult, entitled to assistance under the 1970 Act. He had been refused leave to bring judicial review of the decision as to the extent of that assistance.
Held: Leave was granted, and the court decided to . .
At first instance – KM, Regina (on The Application of) v Cambridgeshire County Council SC 31-May-2012
The respondent had assessed the claimant’s annual care needs. He challenged the calculations. The authority had a system which calculated the average needs for support adding a sum to reflect particular critical need. An independent expert had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426710

Convery v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 23 Feb 2010

FTTTx Industrial injuries disablement benefit – employed earner’s employment – contract of service or contract for services – s8 of the Social Security Contributions (Transfer of Functions, etc) Act 1999 -Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2010] UKFTT 90 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions (Transfer of Functions, etc) Act 1999 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408917

Revenue and Customs v Ruas: CA 23 Mar 2010

The court was asked whether an obligation arose to pay child benefit for the children of a Portuguese worker resident here but no longer working for his children living in Portugal.
Held: The benefit was payable.

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 291

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Council Regulation 1408/71 of 14 June 1971, Social Security, Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 146

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – 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 by:

Cited – 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. . .
Cited – 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, Children

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.403480

Tilianu, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 15 Feb 2010

This case raises issues concerning the right of European Union citizens, who have worked as self-employed workers but have ceased to be in work, to be paid jobseeker’s allowances and crisis payments. The central issue turns on whether there is a practical distinction, for the purposes of obtaining certain benefits, between a worker who, prior to becoming unemployed, has been employed and a worker who has been self-employed.

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 213 (Admin), [2010] 3 CMLR 11

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, European

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.402537

Azam v Epping Forest District Council: Admn 8 Oct 2009

The claimant challenged the certificate issued in his prosecution as to the date on which the prosecutor said that sufficient evidence had come into his hands, to commence a prosecution under the 1988 Act.

Judges:

Scott Baker LJ, Cranston J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3177 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Administration Act 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Benefits

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384126

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bracking and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Another: Admn 24 Apr 2013

‘The claimants are all severely disabled people who are current users of the Independent Living Fund (ILF). They seek judicial review of two decisions of the defendant Secretary of State. The first is the consultation engaged in between July and October 2012 as to the impact of the proposed closure of the ILF and the second is the decision made in December 2012 to close the fund.’
Held: The request for judicial review was dismissedm

Judges:

Blake J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 897 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Bracking and Others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 6-Nov-2013
Application for permission to appeal against refusal of leave to bring judicial review of decision by the respondent to close the Independent Living Fund.
Held: McCombe LJ summarised the application of section 149 of the 2010 Act: ‘1 . . . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Discrimination, Benefits

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.472949

Gray, Regina (on the Application of) v Bristol City Council: Admn 3 Sep 2008

The taxpayer had been receiving jobseekers allowance. He received an award of damages for personal injury, and the respondent council suspended his housing benefit. He now sought judicial review of that decision. The council asked several silly questions about his circumstances. The council now said that the suspension had been temporary, and that the proceedings were unnecessary, and sought costs.
Held: Permission to bring a review was refused.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2212 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating, Benefits

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276534

KR, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Another: Admn 30 Jul 2008

The claimant had been involved in child contact and residence proceedings as a result of which the children travelled extensively between two towns. He now appealed after withdrawal of the community care grants made to meet the cost of the travel.

Judges:

Bean J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1881 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Benefits

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.272814