Couronne & Ors v Crawley Borough Council & Ors

Couronne & Ors v Crawley Borough Council & Ors

The habitual residence test does not unlawfully discriminate against the Claimants under the Race Relations Act, the Race Directive, or the ECHR. The test is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, and the refusal to exempt Chagossians is justified. The relevant statutory and regulatory framework immunises the acts of the authorities from challenge on these grounds.

Parties
Claimants: Marie Jenny Couronne and Others; Defendant: Crawley Borough Council; Defendant: The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Defendant: The First Secretary of State; Claimants: Francis Eddy Bontemps and Others; Interested Party: West Sussex County Council; Interested Party: Reigate and Banstead Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Habitual Residence Test, Jobseeker's Allowance, Homelessness Assistance, Race Relations Act, Race Directive, European Convention on Human Rights, Proportionality, Legitimate Aim, Discrimination, Judicial Review
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Social Security Law Discrimination Law Habitual Residence Test Jobseeker's Allowance Homelessness Assistance Race Relations Act +6 more

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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marie Jenny Couronne and Others

Claimants

Crawley Borough Council

Defendant

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Defendant

The First Secretary of State

Defendant

Francis Eddy Bontemps and Others

Claimants

West Sussex County Council

Interested Party

Reigate and Banstead Borough Council

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the habitual residence test unlawfully discriminates against Chagossians under the Race Relations Act, the Race Directive, or the European Convention on Human Rights
  2. 2 Whether the refusal to exempt Chagossians from the habitual residence test is irrational or disproportionate

Ratio Decidendi

The habitual residence test does not unlawfully discriminate against the Claimants under the Race Relations Act, the Race Directive, or the ECHR. The test is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, and the refusal to exempt Chagossians is justified. The relevant statutory and regulatory framework immunises the acts of the authorities from challenge on these grounds.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed