header-logo header-logo

31 May 2023
Issue: 8027 / Categories: Legal News , Employment , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

Unlawful DWP policy denied help to destitute claimants

The government cannot refuse advance payments of universal credit to claimants in financial hardship simply because they don’t have a national insurance number (NINo), the Court of Appeal has held.

Universal credit, which is paid in arrears, is not paid until at least five weeks after making a claim. However, the secretary of state may make advance payments where there is financial need and where it looks likely the conditions of benefit will be satisfied. Where a person does not have a NINo, however, no advance payments are made until the claimant’s entitlement to a NINo has been verified by a specialist team.

R (BUI) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; R (Onakoya) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2023] EWCA Civ 566 concerned two individuals who did not have NINos.

The Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) and Central England Law Centre (CELC) successfully argued at appeal that the Department for Work and Pension’s (DWP’s) blanket practice of refusing advance payments without a NINo was unlawful. The court held the legislation did not prevent advance payments to claimants without a NINo.

Michael Bates, head of public law at CELC, said: ‘The transition to mainstream support for those whose immigration status has been recently regularised has been problematic for many years.

‘Delays in allocating NINos and the knock-on delays to benefits payments has left many facing destitution just at the point of increased need. This judgment now means that the DWP will be required to consider putting benefits payments in place almost immediately.

‘It will also remove the need for costly emergency expenditure by local authorities who are often left to pick up the pieces.’

Claire Hall, head of strategic litigation at CPAG, said: ‘This is an important win and must be implemented by the DWP urgently.’

Issue: 8027 / Categories: Legal News , Employment , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Commercial and technology team in Cambridgestrengthened by partner hire

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Hampshire firm appoints head of new family department

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Firm strengthens securities practice with partner return

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