Clue represents a major step towards protecting the vulnerable,say Jamie Burton & Alex Gask
Lord Hoffmann observed in R (on the application of Westminster City Council) v National Asylum Support Service [2002] 4 All ER 654 that “there was a time when the welfare state did not look at your passport or ask why you were here. The state paid contributory benefits on the basis of contribution and means-tested benefits on the basis of need.” However, “[a]s immigration became a political issue, this changed…Voters became concerned that the welfare state should not be a honey pot which attracted the wretched of the earth.”
This attitude towards state support and immigration is perhaps epitomised by Sch 3 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002: Withholding and withdrawal of support. The impact of this schedule has, however, been reined in by the Court of Appeal in its recent judgment in Clue v Birmingham City Council (Shelter intervening) [2010] EWCA Civ 460, [2010] All ER (D) 27 (May), striking a significant blow
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=961ae4db_1)
95ca96e3d47f4eff8d147c4f0df17c77.tmb-mov69x69.png?sfvrsn=3db5d86b_1)
