header-logo header-logo

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

28 March 2012
Categories: Legislation
printer mail-detail

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 ESA

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll