‘Wrong leg’ fraud case dropped at Exeter Crown Court – BBC News
“A man accused of benefits fraud has had his prosecution dropped because the investigations looked at the wrong leg.”
BBC News, 20th August 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“A man accused of benefits fraud has had his prosecution dropped because the investigations looked at the wrong leg.”
BBC News, 20th August 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Desmond Rutledge considers the scenarios in which judicial review is available as a solution to certain housing benefit issues and provides specific examples of housing benefit decisions that are susceptible to judicial review.”
Garden Court Chambers Blog, 13th August 2013
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
“The High Court has rejected claims for a judicial review of the so-called ‘bedroom tax’. Its judgment brings to an end – for the time being at least – months of speculation about the lawfulness of arguably the most controversial aspect of the Government’s welfare reform programme.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 31st July 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
Fox v British Airways plc [2013] EWCA Civ 972; [2013] WLR (D) 330
“Where a claimant could establish liability for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination in respect of his son who had been a member of a company pension scheme and who died shortly after dismissal by the company for medical incapacity, the son’s estate would be entitled to compensation in a sum equivalent to the full amount of the death in service benefit that would have been payable under the scheme if the son had remained in employment at the date of his death.”
WLR Daily, 31st July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The refusal of the Secretary of State to exclude some disabled persons from the changes introduced into the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 by the Housing Benefit (Amendment) Regulations 2012, and the provision made by way of access to discretionary housing payments, constituted a proportionate approach to difficulties which those persons faced.”
WLR Daily, 30th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Lloyd v Lewisham London Borough Council and another [2013] EWCA Civ 923; [2013] WLR (D) 317
“Paragraph 14(1)(e) of Schedule 5 to the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 and paragraph 15(1)(e) of Schedule 4 to the Council Tax Benefit Regulations 2006, both of which set out the items of income to be disregarded when calculating a claimant’s income and capital for the purposes of determining entitlement to the relevant benefit, only excluded sums paid under agreements which were made after the injury occurred, not an income loss award paid exclusively for loss of income pursuant to a pre-injury agreement.”
WLR Daily, 29th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The High Court has unanimously dismissed an application for a declaration that the so-called ‘bedroom tax’ discriminates unlawfully against disabled claimants.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 31st July 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“The headline here, as has been widely tweeted/flashed etc, is that the challenge to the bedroom tax contained in Regulation B13, Housing Benefit Regulations (both generically and specifically in relation to households with a disabled person) was unsuccessful in the Divisional Court (R(MA) Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWHC 2213 – not on Baili yet, but available to download from Adam Wagner’s site); but the Court came close to granting injunctive relief against the Secretary of State to make regulations bringing Burnip/Gorry into effect, as opposed to relying simply on a Circular. The DWP had argued that they were entitled to rely on guidance by way of Circular ‘pending a decision on whether and at what point in time to introduce regulations’ (Laws LJ’s emphasis). On that point, rarely have I read such strong words as appear in Laws LJ’s judgment at [91]-[92]. That is an ouch moment for the DWP which, I bet, will not be widely reported, so let me headline the quote here: ‘The Secretary of State has no business considering whether to introduce regulations to conform HB provision with the judgment in Gorry. He is obliged to do so.’ The only thing which stopped injunctive relief was that their drafting was ‘under consideration’ after 14 months (!).”
NearlyLegal, 3oth July 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“Campaigners have vowed to fight on after a legal attempt to block the Government’s so-called ‘bedroom tax’ was thrown out by the High Court.”
The Independent, 30th July 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“A BBC documentary on the welfare state breached impartiality and accuracy guidelines, the BBC Trust has found.”
BBC News, 30th July 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The government will attempt to overturn the judgment of a multimillion-pound case affecting almost a quarter of a million unemployed people on Monday.”
The Guardian, 29th July 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A single helpline to act as ‘a safety net’ for those who can not find legal help and a £100m national advice fund, are likely to be two of more eye-catching recommendations of the Low Commission on the Future of Advice and Legal Support reports Jon Robins.”
LegalVoice, 17th July 2013
Source: www.legalvoice.org.uk
“Ministers are to look at curtailing benefits for those suspected of terror offences, the home secretary has said.”
BBC News, 8th July 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“At a time when the bedroom tax is coming to dominate debates about housing and fairness in our society, Liz Davies considers the options available to local councils in resisting this policy of central government.”
Garden Court Chambers Blog, 1st July 2013
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
“Judges in England and Scotland are being asked to explain why they believe someone is unfit to work, in a move ministers hope will improve the decision-making process on benefits.”
BBC News, 21st June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“We’ve all seen the ubiquitous scene from the American court-room drama where the bespectacled and previously underrated legal assistant/student/intern etc. bursts into the back of the crowded court, and shouts ‘State v. Jones’ whilst waving the paper judgment triumphantly at the judge. The judge is thereby stopped from making the patently unjust ruling he was about to make, changing his mind in favour of the film’s protagonist. This doesn’t happen in real life, so it was with much anticipation that I awaited the case of Johnson v Old [2013] EWCA Civ 415, which I used in court less than 24 hours after it was handed down. My thanks go to Karen Reid, one of our pupils at 1 Gray’s Inn Square, who rushed from the RCJ, clutching the judgment, ink still drying from Sir John Chadwick’s quill (well, printer at least).”
The Barristers’ Hub, 12th June 2013
Source: www.barristershub.co.uk
“Iain Duncan Smith and parliament have conspired to undermine the basic rights of hundreds of thousands of jobseekers by enacting retrospective emergency legislation, according to the contents of a legal filing sent to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).”
The Guardian, 11th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Abandoned migrant and trafficked children will be left destitute and at risk of exploitation if the government goes ahead with a plan to introduce residency tests to determine whether they qualify for legal aid, child protection experts are warning.”
The Guardian, 2nd June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Regina v Jawad [2013] EWCA Crim 644; [2013] WLR (D) 209
“There was no mandatory duty to take the confiscation order made under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 into account when deciding on a compensation order, but the question of compensation might have been relevant to disproportion, if compensation meant that money restored to the loser would have been counted again in the confiscation order, so it was necessary to consider both issues together.”
WLR Daily, 3rd May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk