header-logo header-logo

06 October 2011
Issue: 7484 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Human rights

Bah v United Kingdom (App No 56328/07) [2011] ECHR 1448, [2011] All ER (D) 134 (Sep)

It would be legitimate to put in place criteria according to which a benefit such as social housing could be allocated, where there was insufficient supply to satisfy demand, so long as criteria were not arbitrary or discriminatory. To be workable, any welfare system had to use broad categorisations to distinguish between different groups in need. Further, member states could be justified in distinguishing between different categories of aliens resident on its territory and in limiting the access of certain categories of aliens to resource-hungry public services. By bringing her son into the UK in full awareness of the condition attached to his leave to enter, the applicant had accepted that condition and had effectively agreed not to have recourse to public funds to support her son.

It was justifiable for the government to differentiate between those who relied for priority need status on a person who was in the UK unlawfully or on the condition that they had no recourse

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll