Sumpter, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Sumpter, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

The consultation process, viewed in its entirety including the 2013 consultation, was not unfair or unlawful. The Secretary of State provided consultees with a proper opportunity to comment on the 20m threshold, considered all options with an open mind, and had due regard to the public sector equality duty. The...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Steven Sumpter; Defendant: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Consultation Process, Disability Benefits, Public Sector Equality Duty, Personal Independence Payment (pip), Disability Living Allowance (dla), Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Social Security Law Equality Law Consultation Process Disability Benefits Public Sector Equality Duty Personal Independence Payment (pip) Disability Living Allowance (dla) +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steven Sumpter

Claimant

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the consultation process regarding the 20m threshold for PIP enhanced rate mobility was fair and lawful
  2. 2 Whether consultees were provided with sufficient information to enable an intelligent response
  3. 3 Whether the Secretary of State complied with the public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010

Ratio Decidendi

The consultation process, viewed in its entirety including the 2013 consultation, was not unfair or unlawful. The Secretary of State provided consultees with a proper opportunity to comment on the 20m threshold, considered all options with an open mind, and had due regard to the public sector equality duty. The claim therefore fails on all grounds.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed