HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) with effect from 1 April 2011
Highlighted decisions March 2021
Great Britain and Northern Ireland decisions highlighted by the Editorial Board in March 2021
Carers Allowance
SSWP v AS (CA) [2021] UKUT 24 (AAC)
CG/2617/2019
Can a person who would otherwise be a "person subject to immigration control" under Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, s 115(9) rely on the provisions of SI 2000/636 which exempt a member of a family of a national of a state which is a party to the Oporto Agreement on the European Economic Area if the national has not exercised freedom of movement rights? CDLA/708/2007 followed, on additional grounds. JFP v Department for Social Development (DLA) [2012] NiCom 267 not followed.
Child Tax Credit
RJ v HMRC; HMRC v RJ [2021] UKUT 40 (AAC)
CTC/2649/2019; CTC/392/2020
Tax credits couples and joint claims – death of spouse - construction of s.3 of Tax Credits Act 2002 – whether claimant subject to unlawful discrimination under Human Rights Act 1998 on basis of status as widower - effect of regulation 15(3) of Tax Credits (Claims and Notifications) Regulations 2002 - whether appeal lapsed and effect of lapse on appeal to Upper Tribunal – whether HMRC entitled to withdraw erroneous concession.
Employment and Support Allowance
SK v Department for Communities [2020] NI Com 73
C9/20-21(ESA)
A claimant had been “migrated” to ESA along with severe disability premium (SDP) based on a DLA award. The DLA award ceased at the relevant passport rate, but the SDP remained in payment, leading to an overpayment. I observed that I could not envisage a rational modern computerised system of administration of benefits, where the rate of one benefit is conditional on entitlement to another, which does not verify the details of that other award. I heard evidence regarding the computerised system in Northern Ireland generally, and specific to the case. This indicated, consistent with an appropriate system notification, that the appellant’s ESA claim had been accessed on the Department’s computer three days after his DLA award was superseded, albeit that no action was taken.
Housing Benefit
CM v (1) Bradford Metropolitan District Council (2) SSWP [2020] UKUT 285 (AAC)
CH/4167/2013
Housing benefit – whether limiting housing benefit to the one-bedroom shared accommodation rate in accordance with reg 13D(2) of the Housing Benefit Regulation 2006 amounted to unlawful disability discrimination contrary to Article 14 ECHR – application of the ‘manifestly without reasonable foundation’ test – whether proportionality assessment still required.
Information Rights
DVLA v Information Commissioner and Williams [2020] UKUT 334 (AAC)
GIA/779/2019
Information Rights - FOIA request for information relating to action taken by DVLA to prevent organisations selling driver details to debt collection agency - whether law enforcement exemption (FOIA s.31(1)(g) in conjunction with s.31(2)(a) or (b)) engaged - whether distinction between a public authority's 'functions' and 'powers' - whether DVLA ascertaining non-compliance with the law or whether any person responsible for improper conduct - whether F-tT's refusal to allow reliance on late claimed s.35 exemption unfair - whether FOIA s.40 (personal data) and s.41 (breach of confidence) properly applied by F-tT.
Personal Independence Payment
SE v SSWP (PIP) [2021] UKUT 1 (AAC)
CPIP/1653/2019
The decision examines the definition of "basic written information" in the context of the various descriptors governing activity 8, including what is meant by "signs", the relevance of "dates" and their respective interaction with "words" in descriptor 8(e); what is meant by "standard size text"; and the relationship between descriptors 8(d) and (e). As regards activity 10, it examines the definitions of "simple budgeting decision" and "complex budgeting decision", noting that the requirements within each definition are cumulative; and that each definition requires the capacity for a "decision" to be considered. It also examines the relationship between descriptors 10(c) and 10(d).
Universal Credit
ET v SSWP (UC) [2021] UKUT 47 (AAC)
CUC/747/2020
Identification of those who can in fact accompany the claimant initially on journey to and from work in an unfamiliar location - whether consideration of substantial risk under para. 4 of Sch. 8 to the UC Regs can include travel to and from the Jobcentre and job interviews as well as to and from work – Charlton (RIB)2/09, MW v SSWP [2015] UKUT 665 (AAC) and NS v SSWP (ESA) [2014] UKUT 115 (AAC); [2014] AACR 33 considered – MW not followed.
