French v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions & Anor

French v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions & Anor

Mere gambling, even if it is the sole source of income and conducted professionally, does not amount to self-employment for the purposes of child support maintenance assessment unless it is linked to another business activity; therefore, the appellant's gambling winnings should not be treated as self-employed earnings.

Parties
Appellant: Graham Edward French; First Respondent: The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Second Respondent: Kelly Beckam
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Upper Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Child Support, Maintenance Assessment, Self Employment, Taxable Income, Gambling Winnings
Family Law Social Security Law Child Support Maintenance Assessment Self Employment Taxable Income Gambling Winnings

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 2 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Graham Edward French

Appellant

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

First Respondent

Kelly Beckam

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Upper Tribunal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether professional gambling winnings constitute earnings from gainful employment for child support assessment purposes
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was a self-employed earner under the relevant statutory scheme

Ratio Decidendi

Mere gambling, even if it is the sole source of income and conducted professionally, does not amount to self-employment for the purposes of child support maintenance assessment unless it is linked to another business activity; therefore, the appellant's gambling winnings should not be treated as self-employed earnings.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Decision of the Upper Tribunal set aside as erroneous in law
  • Appeal against the First-tier Tribunal determination allowed