‘Today [24 October] the European Court of Human Rights has ruled, in the case of A v the United Kingdom, that the so-called ‘bedroom tax’ unlawfully discriminates against vulnerable victims of domestic violence.’
Doughty Street Chambers, 24th October 2019
Source: www.doughtystreet.co.uk
‘Case of J. D. and A. v United Kingdom 32949/17 34614/17. The Supreme Court (Lady Hale and Lord Carnwath dissenting) found justified discrimination in imposing the bedroom tax on a woman who, as a result of domestic violence, had had her home treated under the Sanctuary Scheme to include the modification of the attic to render it a “panic room”. (Our report here). The Supreme Court found that this was for a case by case evaluation, not something that required a blanket exemption for a class of people, and there were Discretionary Housing Payments possible. The European Court of Human Rights, in a 5/2 split decision, has now found that it was not justified discrimination.’
Nearly Legal, 27th October 2019
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘A watchdog is to investigate the government’s monitoring of suicides among benefit claimants amid concerns about links between welfare reforms and declining mental health.
The National Audit Office (NAO) said it would call on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to reveal what information it held on the issue, after ministers refused to provide an MP with figures on the number of people in the welfare system who had taken their own lives.’
The Independent, 21st October 2019
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘A coroner has ruled that the Home Office’s “hostile environment” did not contribute to the death of a Windrush citizen who lost his life after spending months struggling to prove his right to live in the UK.’
The Independent, 7th october 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A woman who claimed her son was living in the loft when he had moved to the Philippines has been sentenced for dishonestly claiming thousands of pounds of benefits for him.’
Crown Prosecution Service, 1st October 2019
Source: www.cps.gov.uk
‘Cameron Boyle, political correspondent for the Immigration Advice Service, explains the impact on the children of migrants of having no recourse to public funds and encountering problems with local authorities’ application of Children Act 1989, section 17.’
Family Law Week, 11th September 2019
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘The creator of the children’s TV character Rastamouse has been ordered to do community service for benefit fraud, after the judge’s daughter said the author should not be jailed.’
The Guardian, 10th September 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A private company which was instrumental in stopping the benefits of a disabled woman who later died is going to court in a bid to avoid paying £10,000 awarded in damages to the family.’
The Independent, 6th August 2019
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘A man has been jailed for almost 10 years for selling counterfeit erectile dysfunction and slimming pills and laundering more than £10m through bank accounts linked to a Jewish charity.’
The Guardian, 5th July 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘In order to make good an art 14 claim, a claimant has to establish that (a) the Jones_Jcircumstances fall within the ambit of a substantive Convention right, (b) the claimant has a relevant status for the purposes of art 14, (c) they have been treated differently from others in a similar situation, by reason of their status; if so the burden is then on the state to demonstrate (d) whether the difference in treatment is objectively justified. In a Thlimmenos claim, the third question becomes “they have been treated the same as others in a relevantly different situation”. The way in which those issues were resolved by Lord Wilson for the majority is summarised above, but the court’s analysis of status and justification is worth some closer consideration.’
UKSC Blog, 2nd July 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘In these joined appeals, the Supreme Court considered whether the “revised benefit Jones_Jcap” – the effect of which is to restrict the maximum amount of benefits payable to couples and lone parents to £23000 in London and £20000 elsewhere – discriminated against the lone parents of young children, and against the children themselves. The Supreme Court decided by a majority of 5-2 that it did not, though there were various differences of opinion even amongst the majority.’
UKSC Blog, 2nd July 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘The Supreme Court will this week (3 July) hear an appeal on whether social security tribunals have the power or duty to calculate entitlement to housing benefit without making deductions for under-occupancy, where the application of regulations would breach claimants’ rights under the Human Rights Act.’
Local Government Lawyer, 2nd July 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Samuels v Birmingham City Council [2019] UKSC 28. In unanimously allowing an appeal against a decision to declare the appellant intentionally homeless due to her inability to pay her rent, the Supreme Court affirmed that non-housing benefits are not designed to create a surplus that can be used to account for insufficient housing benefits.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th June 2019
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A coalition of more than 80 benefit charities has submitted a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority over government ads for Universal Credit which they claim are “deliberately misleading”.’
The Independent, 19th June 2019
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Samuels v Birmingham City Council (2019) UKSC 28. The Supreme Court, finally, has delivered its judgment on the issue of the assessment of “reasonable expenses” when considering the affordability of rent in homelessness decisions.’
Nearly Legal, 16th June 2019
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The UK’s highest court has rejected a legal challenge to the benefit cap made by campaigners who argued that it discriminated against single parents with young children.’
The Guardian, 15th May 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘This appeal considered whether the application of the revised benefit cap, introduced by the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016, s 8, to lone parents with children under two years old (i) unlawfully discriminates against parents and/or the children, contrary to ECHR, art 14 with art 8, and/or art 2 of the First Protocol and in breach of the UK’s international obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, art 3, and/or (ii) is irrelevant.’
UKSC Blog, 15th May 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010 asks public authorities to actively consider the way in which their policies and their most strategic decisions can increase or decrease inequalities. I am talking about the socio-economic duty. However, successive governments since 2010 have failed to commence it, to bring it to life in technical terms, which means that public authorities are not technically bound by Section 1.’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 15th May 2019
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
‘An 81-year-old woman killed herself after running out of money when her pension was frozen due to an administrative error.’
The Guardian, 9th May 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A high court judge has suspended a Home Office policy that cuts off after six weeks all statutory support to slavery victims in the UK, ruling that it risks causing “irreparable harm to very vulnerable individuals”.’
The Guardian, 17th April 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025