Bui, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Re Universal Credit) [2023] EWCA Civ 566 (25 May 2023)

Bui, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Re Universal Credit) [2023] EWCA Civ 566 (25 May 2023)

The Court held that s.1(1B)(b) SSAA 1992 requires claimants to provide genuine evidence justifying NINo allocation, not merely evidence that appears genuine. The Secretary of State's two-stage process for NINo allocation is rational and lawful. However, the Secretary of State's blanket refusal to consider advance payments for claimants without a NINo is flawed; the likelihood criterion in reg 5 of the Payments on Account Regulations should be considered on a case-by-case basis, not categorically excluded.

Citation
[2023] EWCA Civ 566
Parties
Claimant / Appellant: Ngoc Hong Thi Bui; Claimant / Appellant: Idowu Onakoya; Defendant / Respondent: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Appeal From Upper Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in part; Secretary of State's policy found flawed regarding advance payments but overall practice lawful.
Legal Topics
Universal Credit, National Insurance Number, Advance Payments, Entitlement Conditions, Judicial Review
Social Security Law Administrative Law Universal Credit National Insurance Number Advance Payments Entitlement Conditions Judicial Review

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ngoc Hong Thi Bui

Claimant / Appellant

Idowu Onakoya

Claimant / Appellant

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Defendant / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Appeal From Upper Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State's policy of not making advance payments to Universal Credit claimants without a National Insurance Number is lawful
  2. 2 Interpretation of s.1(1B)(b) Social Security Administration Act 1992 regarding evidence required for NINo allocation
  3. 3 Rationality of DWP's two-stage process for NINo allocation

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that s.1(1B)(b) SSAA 1992 requires claimants to provide genuine evidence justifying NINo allocation, not merely evidence that appears genuine. The Secretary of State's two-stage process for NINo allocation is rational and lawful. However, the Secretary of State's blanket refusal to consider advance payments for claimants without a NINo is flawed; the likelihood criterion in reg 5 of the Payments on Account Regulations should be considered on a case-by-case basis, not categorically excluded.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in part; Secretary of State's policy found flawed regarding advance payments but overall practice lawful.

Orders

  • Secretary of State must consider the likelihood criterion for advance payments on a case-by-case basis for claimants without a NINo.
  • No further relief granted as claimants have received their entitlements.