Tag: Benefits

(Un-named) Incapacity Benefit: NISSCS 18 Feb 1998

Application by the claimant for leave to appeal against the decision of a Social Security Appeal Tribunal which held that claimant was not entitled to incapacity benefit from and including 10 June 1996 as he only scored 12 points in the All Work Test.

Citations:

[1998] NISSCSC C15/98(IB)

Links:

Bailii

Northern Ireland, Benefits

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.240718

L.H. Piatkowski v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst grote ondernemingen Eindhoven (Social Security For Migrant Workers): ECJ 9 Mar 2006

ECJ Freedom of movement for workers – Social security – Person simultaneously employed in one Member State and self-employed in another Member State – Person subject to the social security legislation of each of those States – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Article 14cb) and Annex VII – Social security contributions levied on interest paid by a company established in one Member State to a person resident in another Member State.

Citations:

C-493/04, [2005] EUECJ C-493/04

Links:

Bailii

European, Benefits

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.239172

Stephenson, Regina (on the Application Of) v Stockton on Tees Borough Council: CA 26 Jul 2005

The disabled applicant received assistance from her daughter who had given up work to care for her, and whom she paid andpound;45.00 a week. The council applied their policy whch disallowed a deduction from her income of that sum.
Held: The council had treated policy as a rule, which it was not. The council could lawfully apply that policy but had to give consideration to whether the particular situation required it to be departed from. The council had already allowed exceptions for cases where cultural issues arose. The payments made were genuine even though small. The policy was founded on an assumption that the services provided were essentially voluntary. They were not.

Judges:

Sedley LJ, Wall LJ, Richards J

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 960, Times 26-Jul-2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Stephenson, Regina (on the Application Of) v Stockton-On-Tees Borough Council Admn 12-Oct-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Benefits

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.229009

B v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 20 Jul 2005

The Secretary of State sought recovery of overpayment of benefits from an adult with a mental capacity described as below borderline.
Held: The claimant had severe learning disabilities, but nobody had been appointed to handle her affairs. She had been receiving benefits for herself and her children, but her children were then removed from her care. She did not appreciate the need to inform the respondent, but the department claimed that the liability for non-disclosure was strict. There was a lacuna exposed in the secretary’s powers to mitigate the consequences in such exceptional circumstances, but the claimant’s appeal failed.

Judges:

Buxton LJ, Sedley LJ, Sir Martin Nourse

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 929, Times 16-Sep-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987 32

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228917

Parry v Halton Magistrates’ Court and Another: Admn 20 Jun 2005

Judges:

Field J, Rose LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1486 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Administration Act 1992 111A(1A)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Not Approved – Mote v Regina CACD 21-Dec-2007
The defendant appealed his convictions for offences relating to the claiming of benefits, saying that he was immune from prosecution as a member of the European Parliament, and that the verdicts were inconsistent with acquittals on other charges. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Crime

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228902

Dodl and Oberhollenzer (Social Security For Migrant Workers): ECJ 7 Jun 2005

ECJ Regulations (EEC) Nos 1408/71 and 574/72 – Family benefits – Child-raising allowance – Entitlement to benefits of the same kind in the Member State of employment and the Member State of residence.
Grand Chamber – The claim related to Austrian women working in Austria but living in Germany with their German husbands who worked in Germany. They were on unpaid maternity leave and the issue was whether Germany or Austria was responsible for paying family benefits.
Held: ‘a person has the status of an ’employed person’ within the meaning of Regulation No 1408/71 where he is covered, even if only in respect of a single risk, on a compulsory or optional basis, by a general or special social security scheme mentioned in article 1(a) of that Regulation, irrespective of the existence of an employment relationship.’

Citations:

[2005] ECR I-5065, [2005] EUECJ C-543/03

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: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.226013

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v W: CA 18 May 2005

The claimant had been married with children. Her husband was accused of abuse of the children, and bailed to live away from home, and then convicted and imprisoned. The claimant applied for income support on the basis that she had been abandoned within the regulations. The Secretary of State appealed a finding that she had been.
Held: The meaning of ‘abandoned’ in benefits law is to be taken to be the same as ‘desertion’ in matrimonial law. The husband would be deemed to be in desertion, and the benefits were payable accordingly.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 570, Times 11-Jun-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions and Benefit Act 1992 12494), Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 17(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Sickert v Sickert 1899
The court discussed the doctrine of constructive desertion in family law: ‘In most cases of desertion the guilty party actually leaves the other but it is not always or necessarily the guilty party who leaves the matrimonial home. In my opinion, the . .
Cited – Griffiths v Griffiths CA 1964
The test for whether there had been constructive desertion was: ‘Was the husband guilty of such grave and weighty misconduct that he must have known that his wife, if she acted like any reasonable woman in her position, would in all probability . .
Cited – Ingram v Ingram 1956
The wife had been convicted of treason, and imprisoned. The husband claimed constructive desertion:
Held: A marriage partner’s criminal conduct can amount to constructive desertion if that conduct ‘strikes at the roots of the matrimonial . .
Cited – Lang v Lang PC 1955
It is the intention of the deserting party which establishes desertion, and that the intention permanently to end a relationship can be readily inferred. Where a husband’s conduct towards his wife was such that a reasonable man would know, and that . .
Cited – Beeken v Beeken 1948
The separation element in desertion may result from a period of compulsory detention. . .
Cited – Sickert v Sickert 1899
The court discussed the doctrine of constructive desertion in family law: ‘In most cases of desertion the guilty party actually leaves the other but it is not always or necessarily the guilty party who leaves the matrimonial home. In my opinion, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.224946

Department for Works and Pensions v Richards; Regina v Richards (Michael): CACD 3 Mar 2005

After conviction for benefits fraud, the defendant appealed a confiscation order, saying that had he made appropriate claims for state benefirs under other heads, the loss to the state would have been much less (andpound;3000 not andpound;19,000).
Held: The defendant was unable to set off against the amount ordered to be paid any sum which he might have recovered by way of working family tax credit had he declared his earnings. The court was not under a duty to inquire as to the extent to which the defendant’s false claim was only a notional benefit.

Judges:

Rose LJ, David Steel, Hallett JJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Crim 491, Times 11-Mar-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Administration Act 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Currey CACD 1995
The defendant was one of four conspirators who had between them obtained andpound;220,000 by fraud. There was no evidence before the trial judge to enable him to determine how the proceeds had been divided between the conspirators or, it seems, to . .
Cited – Regina v May; Regina v Bravard; Regina v Stapleton CACD 28-Jan-2005
The defendants had created limited companies for the sole purpose of making fraudulent reclaims of VAT. They appealed confiscation orders which attributed to each of them the whole sum received by the companies, rather than a proportionate part.
Cited – Regina v Smith (David) CACD 2002
When considering the making of a confiscation order, the court was not to make any allowance for the fact that the property had been destroyed. . .
Cited – Regina v Patel CACD 2000
The defendent pleaded guilty to conspiring to obtain property by deception. He admitted receiving a total of andpound;51,920.
Held: This amount represented his benefit from his relevant criminal conduct for the purpose of the Act. That he had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Benefits

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223364

Gezer v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 17 Dec 2004

Judges:

Mr Justice Elias Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1730

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Gezer v Secretary of State for Home Department and others CA 2-Apr-2004
Application adjourned pending decision of House of Lords . .
Appeal from – Gezer, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 14-Apr-2003
. .

Cited by:

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

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.220344

Vera Hoeckx v Openbaar Centrum Voor Maatschappelijk Welzijn, Kalmthout: ECJ 27 Mar 1985

Minimum means of subsistence – Concept of social advantage or benefit. General social benefits of a kind not listed in article 4(1) were held not to constitute a social security benefit within the meaning of Regulation 1408/71

Citations:

R-249/83, [1985] EUECJ R-249/83, [1987] 3 CMLR 638

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

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.

Benefits

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215308

Nv Tiel-Utrecht Schadeverzekering v Gemeenschappelijk Motorwaarborgfonds: ECJ 15 Mar 1984

1. Social security for migrant workers – rights of institutions responsible for benefits against liable third parties – institution – meaning – (regulation no 1408/71 of the council, art. 1(n) and art. 93)
2. Social security for migrant workers – community regulations – matters covered – ‘industrial agreements’ – exclusion (regulation no 1408/71 of the council, art. 1(j))

1. The term ‘institution’ in article 93 of regulation no 1408/71 means, in respect of each member state, the body or authority responsible for administering all or part of the member state’s legislation relating to the branches or schemes of social security mentioned in that regulation.
2. Regulation no 1408/71 does not apply to ‘industrial agreements’ (dispositions conventionnelles). Therefore the relationship existing between an insured person and an insurance company under insurance having a purely contractual basis does not, by reason of its nature, fall within the scope of regulation no 1408/71.

Citations:

R-313/82, [1984] EUECJ R-313/82

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215228

Bestuur Van Het Algemeen Ziekenfonds Drenthe-Platteland v Pierik: ECJ 31 May 1979

Benefits in kind for pensioners. The Court was asked whether a person receiving an invalidity pension in the Netherlands was entitled to reclaim the cost of medical treatment in Germany.
Held: The status of ‘worker’ for the purpose of article 22 was not restricted to active as opposed to inactive workers. Such pensioners came within the provisions of the Regulation concerning ‘workers’, including article 22, by virtue of their insurance under a social security scheme, ‘unless they are subject to special provisions laid down regarding them’

Citations:

[1979] ECR 1977, [1979] EUECJ R-182/78

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Bestuur van Het Algemeen Ziekenfonds Drenthe-Platteland v G Pierik ECJ 16-Mar-1978
Medical treatment. . .

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: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214824

Rita Frilli v Belgian State: ECJ 22 Jun 1972

Preliminary Questions – Guaranteed income for old people.

Citations:

R-1/72, [1972] EUECJ R-1/72, [1973] CMLR 386, [1972] ECR 457

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

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.

Benefits

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214168

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 – Entitlement to social assistance benefits.
Advocate General Geelhoed said: ‘So long as social security systems have not been harmonised in terms of the level of benefits, there remains a risk of social tourism, ie moving to a Member State with a more congenial social security environment.’ and ‘The basic principle of Community law is that persons who depend on social assistance will be taken care of in their own Member State.’

Citations:

C-456/02, [2004] EUECJ C-456/02, [2004] All ER (EC) 1065, [2004] ECR I-7573, [2005] CEC 139, [2004] 3 CMLR 38, [2004] All ER 1065, ECLI:EU:C:2004:488

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Zalewska v Department for Social Development HL 12-Nov-2008
(Northern Ireland) The claimant challenged the rules restricting payment of benefits to nationals from the 8 latest European Accession states to those with an unbroken 12 month working record. The applicant came from Poland and worked at two . .
Cited – 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 . .
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.

Benefits

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214252

Puglia v C James and Sons: EAT 24 Oct 1995

The EAT considered the effect of the receipt of benefits during a period of sickness when calculating loss of earnings, and whether a hearing was properly conducted without the presence of the parties.
Held: There is no procedural irregularity in the Tribunal members holding a meeting in the absence of the parties for the purposes of reaching their decision on evidence and argument already before them.
As to the affect of the receipt of statutory sick pay: ‘In our judgment, the industrial tribunal correctly applied the law in deducting from the estimated loss of earnings the statutory sick pay received by Mr Puglia over the relevant period. The law on this topic was settled by the Appeal Tribunal in Sun and Sand Ltd v Fitzjohn [1979] IRLR 154 . . It was not suggested in this case that Mr Puglia’s contract of employment provided that he would be entitled to his full wages in addition to any statutory sick pay which he received. The industrial tribunal were therefore correct in making a deduction for the statutory sick pay received by Mr Puglia.’

Judges:

Mummery J

Citations:

[1995] UKEAT 777 – 93 – 2410, [1996] ICR 301, [1996] IRLR 70

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – C James and Sons v Puglia EAT 15-Jan-1992
The claimant had been made redundant after many years. He had worked for a farming partnership, and there had been recent changes in the partnership constitution. . .
Cited – Sun and Sand Ltd v Fitzjohn 1979
The EAT considered the deduction of sickness benefit from the compensatory award. Arnold J said: ‘The appellants before us say that that amount of sick ness benefit should be deducted from the amount awarded within the compensatory award for the 13 . .
Cited – Hilton International Hotels (UK) Ltd v Faraji EAT 10-Jan-1994
No reduction in compensation for unfair dismissal was to be made for invalidity benefit. . .
Cited – SH Muffett Ltd v Head EAT 1986
The Tribunal was asked to award damages for the loss of statutory protection and also loss of notice period, ‘what is generally referred to as the ‘loss of the right to long notice’ or, more particularly, it is the loss of a right in the event of . .

Cited by:

See Also – C James and Sons v Puglia CA 19-Feb-1997
. .
Cited – Langley and Another v Burso EAT 3-Mar-2006
The claimant had been dismissed shortly after becoming unable to work. She sought payment of her normal salary during the period of notice saying this was established good practice.
Held: ‘We are put in the invidious position of being bound by . .
Cited – Knapton and others v ECC Card Clothing Ltd EAT 7-Mar-2006
EAT Unfair Dismissal: Compensation
Reversing the Employment Tribunal, in the assessment of compensation for unfair dismissal under Employment Rights Act 1996 section 123, an employee who took early receipt . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Benefits

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.209414

Cotton v Secretary of State for Works and Pensions: CA 14 Dec 2009

The court considered whether accrued holiday pay paid on the termination of an employment was ‘earnings of the same kind’ as the claimants wages for the purposes of a claim for carer’s allowance.

Judges:

Laws, Wilson, Goldring JLJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 1333, [2010] AACR 17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.384060

(Un-named) (DLA): SSCS 16 Oct 2002

Disability Living Allowance

Citations:

[2002] UKSSCSC CDLA – 1338 – 2001

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Kansal (2) HL 29-Nov-2001
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act.
Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433.
The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.197619