Social Security in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • KA and Others (Adequacy of maintenance)
    • Asylum and Immigration Tribunal
    • 04 Set 2006

    To do so is to encourage the view that immigrant families need less, or can be expected to live on less, and in certain areas of the country would be prone to create whole communities living at a lower standard than even the poorest of British citizens.

  • Cooke v Secretary of State for Social Security
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 25 Abr 2001

  • R (RJM) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
    • House of Lords
    • 22 Oct 2008

    The fact that there are grounds for criticising, or disagreeing with, these views does not mean that they must be rejected. Of course, there will come a point where the justification for a policy is so weak, or the line has been drawn in such an arbitrary position, that, even with the broad margin of appreciation accorded to the state, the court will conclude that the policy is unjustifiable.

  • Humphreys v Revenue and Customs Commissioners
    • Supreme Court
    • 16 May 2012

    The phrase "manifestly without reasonable foundation" dates back to James v United Kingdom (1986) 8 EHRR 123, para 46, which concerned the compatibility of leasehold enfranchisement with article 1 of the First Protocol. "Similarly, the decision to link eligibility for REA to the pension system was reasonably and objectively justified, given that this benefit is intended to compensate for reduced earning capacity during a person's working life" (para 66).

  • R (Carson) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
    • House of Lords
    • 26 May 2005

    There may be such an obvious, relevant difference between the claimant and those with whom he seeks to compare himself that their situations cannot be regarded as analogous. Then the court's scrutiny may best be directed at considering whether the differentiation has a legitimate aim and whether the means chosen to achieve the aim is appropriate and not disproportionate in its adverse impact.

  • Edwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Bairstow
    • House of Lords
    • 25 Jul 1955

    But, without any such misconception appearing ex facie, it may be that the facts found are such that no person acting judicially and properly instructed as to the relevant law could have come to the determination under appeal.

  • R (on the application of SG and Others (previously JS and Others)) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
    • Supreme Court
    • 20 Abr 2016

    That consideration is relevant to these appeals, since the question of proportionality involves controversial issues of social and economic policy, with major implications for public expenditure. The determination of those issues is pre-eminently the function of democratically elected institutions. It is therefore necessary for the court to give due weight to the considered assessment made by those institutions.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT