header-logo header-logo

28 March 2012
Categories: Legislation
printer mail-detail

Employment and Support Allowance (Amendment of Linking Rules) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/919)

Abolish the provision within the Employment and Support Allowance Regulations 2008, SI 2008/794...

Commencement date
1 May 2012

Legislation Affected

SI 2010/1907, SI 2008/794, SI 2006/215, SI 2006/213, SI 1999/991 amended


Summary

Abolish the provision within the Employment and Support Allowance Regulations 2008, SI 2008/794, which allows a period of limited capability for work (LCW) in a claim for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) to link to an earlier period of LCW where the two periods are separated by no more than 104 weeks. Other regulations are also amended as a consequence of that abolition.

Clarify the circumstances in which entitlement to an ESA component arises where a new claim is made within 12 weeks of an earlier award ending.

Clarify when entitlement to a transitional addition awarded as part of the reassessment exercise is retained where a new

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Chair of the Association of Pension Lawyers joins as partner

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Group names Shakespeare Martineau partner head of Sheffield office

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Four legal directors promoted to partner across UK offices

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll