Nessa v Chief Adjudication Officer [1998] EWCA Civ 164 (5 February 1998)

Nessa v Chief Adjudication Officer [1998] EWCA Civ 164 (5 February 1998)

A person cannot be habitually resident in the United Kingdom immediately upon arrival, even if the residence is voluntary and for settled purposes; an appreciable period of residence is required to acquire habitual residence for the purposes of entitlement to income support under the relevant regulations.

Citation
[1998] EWCA Civ 164
Parties
Applicant: Nessa; Respondent: Chief Adjudication Officer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 February 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Social Security Commissioners / Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Income Support, Habitual Residence, Immigration Status, Interpretation of Regulations
Social Security Law Administrative Law Income Support Habitual Residence Immigration Status Interpretation of Regulations

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nessa

Applicant

Chief Adjudication Officer

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Social Security Commissioners / Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a claimant can be habitually resident in the UK immediately upon arrival for the purposes of income support entitlement under the Income Support (General) Regulations 1987, as amended.
  2. 2 Whether an 'appreciable period' of residence is required to establish habitual residence.

Ratio Decidendi

A person cannot be habitually resident in the United Kingdom immediately upon arrival, even if the residence is voluntary and for settled purposes; an appreciable period of residence is required to acquire habitual residence for the purposes of entitlement to income support under the relevant regulations.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Order nisi against legal aid fund