Benefits - 2000

The case shown here are derived from the lawindexpro case law database. lawindexpro is a low cost case law database, with over 260,000 case listings, and over 200,000 links to full text judgments. The free service below shows the core information on the case, but is restricted in several ways. A small proportion of cases do allow access to the full lawindexpro information. These cases are selected at random, and may be different on your next visit. The active links through to lawindexpro are extremely powerful allowing full access to all linked cases.  

This page lists 205 cases, and was prepared on 12 May 2012.

Jankovic -v- Croatia (2000) 30 EHRR CD183
2000 ECHR	Human Rights, Benefits	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	Although a claim to a social security benefit is a possession (thereby attracting article 14) it does not entitle one to anything in particular.
	European Convention on Human Rights

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C1/99-00(SDA)
6 Jan 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C3/99(JSA)
6 Jan 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_4497_1998
7 Jan 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_1347_1999
7 Jan 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_5552_1999
9 Jan 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C6/99(IB)
10 Jan 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C2/99-00(WB)
13 Jan 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_483_1997
13 Jan 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	[ Bailii ]

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C31/99(DLA)
24 Jan 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- South Ribble Borough Council Housing Benefit Review Board, ex parte Hamilton [2000] EWCA Civ 518; (2001) 33 HLR 9
24 Jan 2000 CA Henry, Robert Walker LJJ, Scott Baker J	Benefits, Housing	Casemap
	A statutory provision entitled a person to housing benefit if he had no income above a specified amount, and it had been previously decided that receipt of income support under the separate social security scheme, with its inbuilt rights of adjudication and appeal, bound those administering the housing benefit scheme to treat a person as having income below the specified amount. Mr Hamilton had however obtained income support by false statements. Held: Income support obtained by fraud did not count for the purposes of entitlement to housing benefit. One reason was an express provision in the relevant regulations defining "a person on income support as a person lawfully in receipt of income support", but another was the principle that "legislation should not be so construed as to enable a man to profit from his own wrong":
	[ Bailii ]

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C15/99(IB)
27 Jan 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C8/99(IB)
27 Jan 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Burton -v- Mayor Etc of The London Borough of Camden [2000] UKHL 8; [2000] 2 AC 399; [2000] 1 All ER 943; [2000] 2 WLR 427
27 Jan 2000 HL	Land, Benefits
	One tenant left the other in a flat subject to a protected secure tenancy. The legislation prohibited assignment of such tenancies. In order to support an application by the remaining tenant the departing tenant executed a deed purporting to release her interest in the tenancy. It was held that arcane notions of the ownership of the entire property by each of two joint tenants should not be used to get around the legislation, Whether expressed as assignment, surrender, release or otherwise, it could not change the nature of the tenancy.
	Housing Act 1985
	Link[s] omitted

Everson and Another -v- Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and Another Case C-198/88
1 Feb 2000 ECJ	Employment, Benefits, European
	Where a company in one member state, had employees working in another member state, and those employees and the company as required paid taxes in the company wher ethe work was carrid out, then upon the insolvency of the company, the member state liable as the state guaranteeing the employment obligations of the insolvent employer was the state in which the work was carried out, and not the company's home state.

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C18/99(DLA)
3 Feb 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_4734_1999
7 Feb 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_473_1999
7 Feb 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Wakefield -v- Secretary of State for Social Security and Anor. [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_3510_1997
8 Feb 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_5413_1999
9 Feb 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_111_1998
16 Feb 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Medical examination - claimant not attending cancelled examination - whether "fails . . to attend ... an examination" The claimant was called for examination on 18 February 1997. This was the sixth examination arranged for him. He requested a postponement because he had the opportunity of treatment abroad and was told that the appointment would be cancelled. The adjudication officer then decided that he had failed to attend for examination without good cause and was to be treated as capable of work under regulation 8(2) of the Social Security (Incapacity for Work)(General) Regulations 1995. The tribunal decided good cause had not been shown and dismissed the appeal. The claimant appealed to the Commissioner, contending he could not fail to attend a cancelled examination and complaining that he had been refused benefit on subsequent claims. Held, allowing the appeal, that: once the medical examination had been cancelled, it was impossible for the claimant to fail to attend it; a decision under regulation 8(2) terminated the existing period of incapacity for work and had effect until the effective date of a new claim. It also, for 26 weeks, prevented a claimant from being treated under regulation 28(2) of the same regulations as incapable of work pending assessment under a new claim. The Commissioner substituted his own decision that the claimant was not to be treated as capable of work from 19 February 1997 on the ground of failure to attend or submit to medical examination on 18 February 1997.
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_3512_1998
16 Feb 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_4118_1998
16 Feb 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C15/99(DLA)
17 Feb 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C3/99(IB)
17 Feb 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCR_2127_1999
18 Feb 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C5/99(IS)
21 Feb 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C10/99(IB)
21 Feb 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_2107_1998
23 Feb 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C51/99-00(IB)
23 Feb 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Wakefield -v- Secretary of State for Social Security and another
24 Feb 2000 CA	Child Support, Benefits
	A fireman paying child support retired after being injured. He received a pension in two parts. Both were included as income for the calculation of child support. He claimed that the injury pension should be excluded. Held: He failed. The court said that the injury pension was not a payment of damages for personal injuries, not being calculated by reference to any loss of earnings, or expenses arising from the injury. The way such payments were viewed under tax law was not relevant.

Nabadda and Others -v- Westminster City Council; Gomilsek -v- Haringey London Borough Council
24 Feb 2000 CA	Discrimination, Benefits, European
	Swedish students on vocational courses in the UK had received loans from their home country, but were denied the grants towards their course fees which were made to English students. They claimed race discrimination. Although the withholding of grants was an indirect discrimination, it fell outside the Act and was not actionable because the acts of discrimination were done in pursuance of an enactment or statutory instrument. It was wrong to try to use the Race Relations Act to try to give effect to unrelated European legislation.
	Race Relations Act 1976 41(1)(b)

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C21/99(IB)
28 Feb 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C36/99(IB)
29 Feb 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_1581_1998
6 Mar 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_1678_1999
8 Mar 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C5/99(II)
9 Mar 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	[ Bailii ]

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C34/99(IB)
9 Mar 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C37/99(IB)
9 Mar 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C40/99(DLA)
9 Mar 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C44/99(IB)
9 Mar 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_3586_1999
14 Mar 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C44/99-00(DLA)
14 Mar 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_1115_1999
15 Mar 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Fitzwilliam Executive Search Ltd -v- Bestuur Van Het Landelijk Institut Sociale Verzekeringen Case C-202/97
15 Mar 2000 ECJ	Employment, Benefits, European
	An E101 certificate as to the payment of benefits issued by one member state with respect to the responsibility for social security payments was binding on the member state which received such a certificate. Where however there were proper doubts as to the correctness of the facts asserted as underlying the certificate it was proper to challenge the certificate., and the certificate should be re-examined and if appropriate withdrawn.

Regina -v- Powys County Council, Ex Parte Hambidge (No 2)
16 Mar 2000 CA	Health, Benefits, Local Government, Discrimination	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	Where a local authority raised the care charges for facilities and services provided to disabled people charging different rates according to the benefits received, and where some benefits were received according to the level of disability, that differentiation did not amount to disability discrimination. The differences arose form the different levels of benefits paid to those asking for these services.
	Disability Discrimination Act 1995 20 - National Health Service Community Care Act 1990

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CSDLA_536_1999
24 Mar 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Wilkinson -v- Chief Adjudication Officer [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_256_1998
24 Mar 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	[ Bailii ]

Wilkinson -v- Chief Adjudication Officer [2000] EWCA Civ 88
24 Mar 2000 CA Lord Justice Evans, Lord Justice Potter and Lord Justice Mummery	Land, Benefits	Casemap 1 Cites
	The claimant owned a half share in a property. It was said that this brought her disposable capital above the limit to make a claim. She had inherited it, but had transferred it to her brother in satisfaction of her mother's wishes.
	Income Support (General) Regulations 1987
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CSDLA_551_1999
24 Mar 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_2066_1999
27 Mar 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C45/99-00(DLA)
27 Mar 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Banks and Others -v- Theate Royal De La Monnaie C-178/97; [2000] EUECJ C-178/97
30 Mar 2000 ECJ	Employment, Benefits, European, European
	A self employed certificate in Form E101 issued by one member state for a worker who worked temporarily in another member state was to be treated as valid and respected in the absence of circumstances suggesting some invalidity. It made the worker subject to the social security rules of his home state. Such a certificate when issued could have retrospective effect.
	[ Europa ] - [ Bailii ]

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_1974_1998
31 Mar 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C38/99(IB)
3 Apr 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C39/99(DLA)
3 Apr 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C52/99-00(IB)
5 Apr 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Wisely -v- John Fulton Plumbers Ltd (Scotland) and Wadey -v- Surrey County Council [2000] UKHL 24; [2000] 1 WLR 820
6 Apr 2000 HL	Personal Injury, Damages, Benefits, Scotland	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	A plaintiff in a personal injury action, was entitled to claim, and be paid, interest on his award for compensation for lost earnings, even though some part of it was to be paid direct to the Department of Social Security by way of recovery of benefits. The scheme for recovery of benefits paid deliberately stayed clear of complications which would arise if attempts were to be made to recalculate awards if interest on this element was not to be included. Section 17 meant that interest had to be calculated by reference to a figure which ignored the fact that benefits had been received and ignored the fact that the defendant was paying the benefits to the Secretary of State.
	Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997 17
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C3/99(REA)
7 Apr 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_1148_1997
11 Apr 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C8/99(IS)
17 Apr 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C56/99-00(IB)
17 Apr 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C3/00-01(DLA)
18 Apr 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C47/99-00(DLA)
18 Apr 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Cornwell -v- United Kingdom; Leary -v- United Kingdom 36578/97; (2000) 27 EHRR CD62; [2000] ECHR 167; [2000] ECHR 168
25 Apr 2000 ECHR	Human Rights, Benefits, Discrimination	Casemap 1 Citers
	Mr Cornwell's wife had died on 24 October 1989, leaving a dependent child. On 7 February 1997 his representative had "contacted" the Benefits Agency to enquire about widow's benefits. On 14 February 1997 the Agency "answered" to say that legislation provided only for widows and not widowers. On 28 March 1997 the Agency confirmed that if Mrs Cornwell's record had been that of a man, her survivor would have been entitled to Widow's Payment and WMA. The position of the Government was set out in the decision as follows: "The Government contest the admissibility of the application insofar as it relates to the period 24 October 1989 to 7 February 1996. They point out that the applicant did not attempt to claim widows' benefits until 7 February 1997 and that it was only from this date onwards that the legislation was applied to him. Had a woman claimed widows' benefits on 7 February 1997 in respect of the death of her husband in October 1989, she would have been told that she was out of time for claiming a widow's payment and that she could only claim widowed mothers' allowance with effect from 8 February 1996. The UK had agreed to pay the benefit equally until the coming into force of legislation which would correct the situation.
	[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C33/99(DLA)
26 Apr 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Shackell -v- United Kingdom 45851/99
27 Apr 2000 ECHR	Human Rights, Family, Benefits
	The court held inadmissible a claim by an unmarried woman to widow's benefit. The parties having chosen not to marry, they could not complain of not having the legal benefits of a marriage. The promotion of marriage by way of limited benefits for surviving spouses could not be said to exceed the margin of appreciation afforded to the Government: "The court accepts that there may well not be an increased social acceptance of stable personal relationships outside the traditional notion of marriage. However, marriage remains an institution which is widely accepted as conferring a particular status on those who enter it."

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C1/00-01(DLA)
5 May 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC A5/99-00(II)
6 May 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Chief Adjudication Officer -v- Faulds [2000] UKSSCSC CSI_26_1996
11 May 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Chief Adjudication Officer -v- Faulds (Scotland) [2000] UKHL 26; [2000] 2 All ER 961; [2000] 1 WLR 1035
11 May 2000 HL	Health and Safety, Scotland, Benefits
	A claim for industrial injuries benefit must be related to an identifiable accident. Where the injury, being psychological, arose from exposure to a multiple of serious accidents, and no particular one or identified series, could properly be said to be the cause of the injury, the benefit was not payable. The distinction is between an accident and a process.
	Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 94(1)
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C37/99(DLA)
12 May 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C2/00-01(DLA)
15 May 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_4354_1999
17 May 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CFC_2613_1997
22 May 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CF_66_1997
23 May 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Hepple and Others -v- Adjudication Officer C-196/98; [2000] EUECJ C-196/98
23 May 2000 ECJ	Discrimination, Benefits, European, European
	The payment of differing amounts by way of an earnings allowance to men and women was not discriminatory, where the reason for the difference lay in the differing statutory retirement ages for men and women. The regime for equal treatment for statutory benefits must allow for arrangements to come into effect after the legislation came into effect to reflect historically different treatments.
	Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992
	Link[s] omitted

Hepple and Others. -v- Adjudication Officer [2000] UKSSCSC CI_16608_1996
23 May 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C4/00-01(IB)
24 May 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC CSC4/99
24 May 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C20/99(DLA)
24 May 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	[ Bailii ]

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CI_1307_1999
25 May 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Stewart-V-Advocate for Scotland [2000] UKSSCSC CSDLA_512_1998
30 May 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	[ Bailii ]

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_745_1999
1 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C41/99(IB)
2 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C12/99(IB)
3 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_4090_1999
5 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC A98/99(IB)
5 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC A82/99-00(DLA)
5 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C8/00-01(IB)
6 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C58/99-00(IB)
6 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C57/99-00(IB)
7 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_3418_1998
7 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_3066_1998
7 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CI_5880_1999
8 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CJSA_4435_1998
12 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CF_3662_1999
12 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C43/99(IB)
12 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_4490_1998
13 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CA_1014_1999
14 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_714_1998
15 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	[ Bailii ]

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC A170/99-00(IB)
20 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Secretary of State for Social Security -v- Maddocks [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_3326_1997
21 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Ballantine -v- Newalls Insulation Co Ltd
22 Jun 2000 CA	Damages, Personal Injury, Benefits
	The purpose of the rules was to provide statutory compensation for the pneumoconiosis suffered in this injury. Where therefore that person received damages for the same injury, the benefits received were to be deducted from the damages before payment.
	Pneumoconiosis etc (Workers Compensation) Act 1979

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_1423_1997
23 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_5216_1998
26 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C2/99(ICA)
26 Jun 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_265_1999
27 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Denson -v- Stevenson and Another [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_3640_1998
27 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Denson -v- Stevenson and Another [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_3640_1999
27 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_4913_1999
28 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust, ex Parte Reffell [2000] EWHC Admin 363
28 Jun 2000 Admn	Health, Benefits
	The applicant had come to England to have heart surgery. He expected to pay, and brought with him sufficient to pay for the operation. Unanticipated complications led to delay, and the depletion of his funds. He applied for the operation to be paid for from NHS funds. The hospital refused, and the court held rightly so. The legislation provided no obligation to provide health services for overseas visitors. Such services were provided on a commercial basis, and the operation would be available to him if he returned home to Nigeria.
	National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors)
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Tower Hamlets London Borough Council; Housing Benefit Review Board, Ex Parte Kapur
28 Jun 2000 QBD	Housing, Benefits
	An application for a loan or grant toward the costs of repair could constitute steps being taken to make premises habitable. The applicant owned a substantial property which had fallen into disrepair. He claimed housing benefit for the property where he actually lived. The refusal of housing benefit because of the capital value of the other property was incorrect. The rules allowed a disregard for the value of a property being repaired.
	Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 No 1971 Sch 5 para 27

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_2760_1998
28 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_5419_1999
29 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CJSA_888_1999
30 Jun 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C41/99-00(DLA)
3 Jul 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_1804_1999
3 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_4727_1999
5 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C6/99(IS)
5 Jul 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C2/00-01(IS)
6 Jul 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_3861_1999
6 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CI_5151_1999
6 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Social Security Commissioner, Ex Parte Chamberlain [2000] EWHC Admin 364
7 Jul 2000 QBD Lightman J	Benefits, Judicial Review	Casemap 1 Citers
	On an application to review an earlier incapacity benefit decision, the adjudicating officer or tribunal must first decide if a material change of circumstances existed since the decision, or whether the decision was founded upon some mistake. Only then should he pass on to question whether the 'all work' test is satisfied. The distinction between the two stages is clear and fundamental. Only if either limb of the first test applied could the second arise.
	Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 25, 171C
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CI_1524_1997
10 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CI_1527_1997
10 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_4722_1998
12 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CJSA_3304_1999
13 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

NMB Holdings Limited -v- Secretary of State for Social Security [2000] EWHC Admin 369
14 Jul 2000 Admn	Benefits
	Social Security Administration Act 1992
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CG_6329_1997
14 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_2259_2000
19 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CSIB_889_1998
26 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- the Housing Benefit Review Board of the London Borugh of Camden ex parte Ramatola Hassani-Kazhadeh [2000] EWHC Admin 378
26 Jul 2000 Admn	Housing, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_5796_1997
26 Jul 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C55/99-00(IB)
31 Jul 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C10/99(IS)
31 Jul 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_5251_1999
3 Aug 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CG_4343_1998
9 Aug 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_4510_1998
10 Aug 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C4/00-01(DLA)
14 Aug 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_6331_1999
15 Aug 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CSDLA_646_1999
15 Aug 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CSDLA_101_2000
16 Aug 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C42/99-00(DLA)
21 Aug 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CSIS_918_1999
21 Aug 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_20002_2000
4 Sep 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC RIS_12_2001
4 Sep 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_230_2000
6 Sep 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C51/99-00(DLA)
6 Sep 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	[ Bailii ]

Regina -v- Wandsworth London Borough Council, Ex Parte O; Leicester City Council, Ex Parte Bhikha [2000] 1 WLR 2539; [2000] EWCA Civ 201; Times, 18 July 2000
7 Sep 2000 CA Simon Brown LJ, Hale LJ	Local Government, Immigration, Benefits	Casemap 1 Citers
	The applicants were immigrants awaiting determination of their applications for exceptional leave to remain, and who came to suffer from serious illness. Each applied for and was refused assistance from their local authority. It was held that the refusals were unlawful. Where circumstances of need arose over and above needs arising from lack of accommodation and funds, then he qualified for assistance irrespective of his immigration status. That status was a matter to be assessed by the Secretary of State, and not by local authorities. The use of the word 'solely' in the new section 21(1A) left the local authority with a responsibility for those whose need for care and attention was attributable to a combination of factors, and not simply to destitution and its effects. If the applicant's need for more care and attention was "to any extent made more acute by some circumstance other than the mere lack of accommodation and funds" e.g. because she is old, ill or disabled, then she is not excluded by section 21(1A).
	National Assistance Act 1948 21(1A)
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C2/00-01(IB)
8 Sep 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CP_3035_1999
12 Sep 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_4885_1998
25 Sep 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Richmond London Borough Council, Ex Parte Watson; Regina -v- Manchester City Council, Ex Parte Stennett; Regina -v- Harrow London Borough Council Ex Parte Cobham; R -v- Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, Ex Parte Armstrong [2000] EWCA Civ 239
28 Sep 2000 CA	Health, Local Government, Benefits	Casemap 1 Cites
	Local Authorities who found themselves obliged to provide care for former mental patients were not free to charge for the services. The section imposing the obligation could not be looked at as a gateway provision before services were provided under other statutory provisions. The references by other sections to services provided under this section made that clear. The care was given by virtue of the councils' obligations under the 1983 Act, not the National Assistance Act.
	National Assistance Act 1948 21 - Mental Health Act 1983 3 117
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CG_1822_1998
28 Sep 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CI_17220_1996
2 Oct 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C11/00-01(IB)
4 Oct 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_7555_1999
4 Oct 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Purdy -v- Social Security Commissioner [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_228_1999
6 Oct 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_5170_1999
9 Oct 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C23/00-01(IB)
10 Oct 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C14/00-01(IB)
10 Oct 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C46/99-00(DLA)
10 Oct 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C14/99-00(IS)
10 Oct 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1999] NISSCSC C36/99(DLA)
11 Oct 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C10/00-01(DLA)
11 Oct 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_5430_1999
13 Oct 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CSIB_160_2000
19 Oct 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_5131_1998
25 Oct 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C1/00-01(IB)
26 Oct 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_6619_1999
30 Oct 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C2/00-01(JSA)
3 Nov 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_3184_1999
7 Nov 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C12/00-01(IB)
7 Nov 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CA_2937_1997
9 Nov 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CA_2604_1998
9 Nov 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_1095_1999
10 Nov 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CG_160_1999
13 Nov 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_1769_1999
13 Nov 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_3433_1999
15 Nov 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CDLA_4388_1999
27 Nov 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCR_4307_2000
27 Nov 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C6/00-01(IB)
28 Nov 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Secretary of State for Social Security -v- Foster and Anor. [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_3749_1997
4 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Janicki -v- Secretary of State for Social Security [2000] UKSSCSC CI_13188_1996
6 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Oladeji -v- Social Security Commissioner [2000] EWCA Civ 419
6 Dec 2000 CA	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CS_4300_1999
11 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C15/00-01(IB)
11 Dec 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CI_4567_1999
11 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	[ Bailii ]

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIB_6904_1999
11 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_2619_1999
12 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CJSA_1114_2000
13 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	[ Bailii ]

Secretary of State for Social Security -v- David [2000] UKSSCSC CJSA_397_1998
15 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CI_3370_1999
15 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Secretary of State for Social Security -v- David [2000] EWCA Civ 330
15 Dec 2000 CA	Benefits
	The applicant had been detained by the police for 42 hours then released. No charge was made. The applicant had suspended his Job-Seeker's Allowance for a week. The applicant challenged a tribunal's finding. Held: The construction of such detention as a physical condition stretched credulity. The applicant was free to suspend benefits. However this appeared to be a lacuna in the law which could mean that anyone unavailable for a few hours would lose their benefits for an entire week.
	Jobseekers Act 1995
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C30/00-01(IB)
18 Dec 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] NISSCSC C16/00-01(IB)
18 Dec 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [1998] NISSCSC C2/98(II)
18 Dec 2000 NISSCS	Northern Ireland, Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CIS_1077_1999
18 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CJSA_3239_1999
18 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CG_4494_1999
19 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CG_5631_1999
19 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CCS_2626_1999
20 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted

Kadhim -v- Housing Benefit Board, London Borough of Brent [2000] EWCA Civ 344; [2001] 2 WLR 1674; [2001] QB 955
20 Dec 2000 CA	Administrative, Benefits, Housing	Casemap 1 Citers
	A lower court was not bound to follow a decision of a higher court, where the decision at issue had been based, on the relevant point, on an unargued assumption about the law, which had in turn been pivotal to the decision of that higher court: "The ratio decidendi of a case is any rule of law expressly or impliedly treated by the judge as a necessary step in reaching his conclusion, having regard to the line of reasoning adopted by him, or a necessary part of his direction to the jury." (Cross and Harris) "We therefore conclude, not without some hesitation, that there is a principle stated in general terms that a subsequent court is not bound by a proposition of law assumed by an earlier court that was not the subject of argument before or consideration by that court." Whether a person living in the same house as a relative was residing with him, was matter for ordinary English usage. The statute did not provide a full and exclusive definition, and the case remitted for reconsideration.
	Link[s] omitted

(Un-named) [2000] UKSSCSC CSDLA_336_2000
27 Dec 2000 SSCS	Benefits
	Link[s] omitted