Levy v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2006] EWCA Civ 890 (24 May 2006)

Levy v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2006] EWCA Civ 890 (24 May 2006)

Regulation 6(1) is intra vires the Social Security Administration Act 1992, being authorised by section 189(5) (and, per Pill LJ, also by section 5(1)(a)). The regulation requires actual receipt of a claim in an appropriate office for the claim to be made; section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 does not apply because the Regulations show a contrary intention by requiring actual receipt, not deemed receipt by posting.

Citation
[2006] EWCA Civ 890
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Levy (Mrs Soni Levy); Defendant/respondent: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Social Security Commissioner / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Ultra Vires, Statutory Interpretation, Date of Claim, Deeming Provisions, Widow's Benefit
Social Security Law Administrative Law Ultra Vires Statutory Interpretation Date of Claim Deeming Provisions Widow's Benefit

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Levy (Mrs Soni Levy)

Claimant/appellant

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Social Security Commissioner / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Regulation 6(1) of the Social Security Claims and Payments Regulations 1987 is ultra vires the Social Security Administration Act 1992
  2. 2 Whether section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to the determination of the date a claim is made under the Regulations

Ratio Decidendi

Regulation 6(1) is intra vires the Social Security Administration Act 1992, being authorised by section 189(5) (and, per Pill LJ, also by section 5(1)(a)). The regulation requires actual receipt of a claim in an appropriate office for the claim to be made; section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 does not apply because the Regulations show a contrary intention by requiring actual receipt, not deemed receipt by posting.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed