header-logo header-logo

16 December 2010
Issue: 7446 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Supreme Court rules on overpayments

Housing benefit & tax credits unaffected

The government cannot recover overpayments of social security benefits where the claimant is not at fault, the Supreme Court has ruled.

In the 12 months from March 2006, the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) wrote to more than 65,000 claimants warning them they had been overpaid and could be sued for repayment.

The letters acknowledged the overpayments were entirely the fault of the government’s own administrative errors—and therefore not recoverable under statutory law, s 71 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992—but warned that court action would be taken under common law in the county court.

Delivering judgment in Child Poverty Action Group v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2010] UKSC 54, Lord Brown said it was “common ground” that overpayment resulting from misrepresentation or non-disclosure could be recovered under s 71.

The issue, he said, was whether s 71 provided an “exclusive code for recovery” or whether common law could be used to recover overpayment arising from “official error”.

Holding the former option, Lord Brown said: “It seems to me inconceivable that Parliament would have contemplated leaving the suggested common law restitutionary route to the recovery of overpayments available to the secretary of state to be pursued by way of ordinary court proceedings alongside the carefully prescribed scheme of recovery set out in the statute.

“Such an arrangement, moreover, would seem to me to create well-nigh insoluble problems. Could there, for example, be parallel recovery proceedings against the maker of the misrepresentation under section 71(3) and against the recipient of the benefit at common law in the courts?”

The ruling does not affect overpayments of housing benefit or tax credits.

 

Issue: 7446 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll