Adiatu & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Her Majesty's Treasury

Adiatu & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Her Majesty's Treasury

The court held that the exclusion of limb b workers from the JRS and SSP, the maintenance of the lower earnings limit, and the rate of SSP were justified responses to the pandemic, falling within the Government's broad margin of discretion in economic and social policy. The measures were not manifestly without reasonable foundation and did not amount to unlawful discrimination under the ECHR or EU law. The Public Sector Equality Duty was complied with in relation to the decisions taken. The application for judicial review was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Ahmed Adiatu; Claimant: Independent Workers Union of Great Britain; Defendant: Her Majesty’s Treasury
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Sick Pay, Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, Indirect Discrimination, Public Sector Equality Duty, Judicial Review, COVID 19 Emergency Legislation
Constitutional Law Employment Law Human Rights Law EU Law Administrative Law Statutory Sick Pay Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme Indirect Discrimination +3 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 4 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmed Adiatu

Claimant

Independent Workers Union of Great Britain

Claimant

Her Majesty’s Treasury

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the exclusion of limb b workers from the Job Retention Scheme (JRS) and Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) is discriminatory under the ECHR and/or EU law
  2. 2 Whether the Government failed to comply with the Public Sector Equality Duty under s 149 Equality Act 2010
  3. 3 Whether the rate and eligibility criteria for SSP are indirectly discriminatory on grounds of sex and/or race under EU law

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the exclusion of limb b workers from the JRS and SSP, the maintenance of the lower earnings limit, and the rate of SSP were justified responses to the pandemic, falling within the Government's broad margin of discretion in economic and social policy. The measures were not manifestly without reasonable foundation and did not amount to unlawful discrimination under the ECHR or EU law. The Public Sector Equality Duty was complied with in relation to the decisions taken. The application for judicial review was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to apply for judicial review granted
  • Application for judicial review dismissed