A was an unmarried childless man over 45 complaining of a law which exempted unmarried childless women over 45 from paying contributions under the General Child Benefits Act. Apart from the exempted women, the entire adult population was subject to the Act, both as contributors and as potential beneficiaries.
Held: A breach of article 14 read with article 1 of the First Protocol was found. The exemption for women had been abolished in 1989 but judgment was not given until 1997. The court rejected a claim for repayment of the contributions from which the applicant would have been exempt if he had been a woman.
[1997] ECHR 6, 20060/92, 24 EHRR 503
Worldlii, Bailii
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Petrovic v Austria ECHR 27-Mar-1998
The applicant was refused a grant of parental leave allowance in 1989. At that time parental leave allowance was available only to mothers. The applicant complained that this violated article 14 taken together with article 8.
Held: The . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v Hindawi and Headley CA 13-Oct-2004
The applicant was a foreign national serving a long-term prison sentence. He complained that UK nationals would have had their case referred to the parole board before his.
Held: The right to be referred to the parole board was a statutory . .
Cited – Wilkinson, Regina (on the Application Of) v Inland Revenue HL 5-May-2005
The claimant said that the widows’ bereavement tax allowance available to a wife surviving her husband should be available to a man also if it was not to be discriminatory.
Held: Similar claims had been taken before the Human Rights Act to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 September 2021; Ref: scu.165471
