TP and AR, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Work And Pensions

TP and AR, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Work And Pensions

The absence of additional disability premiums (SDP and EDP) in universal credit does not constitute unlawful discrimination, as any differential treatment is objectively justified by the legitimate aim of restructuring the welfare system. However, the implementation arrangements, specifically the lack of transitional protection for severely disabled persons who move to a different local housing authority area and are forced onto universal credit, result in unlawful discrimination contrary to Article 14 ECHR, as the differential treatment is not objectively justified and is based on status.

Parties
Claimant: TP; Claimant: AR; Defendant: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Intervener: Equality and Human Rights Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Partially allowed
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Welfare Benefits, Universal Credit, Article 14 ECHR, Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR, Transitional Protection
Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Social Security Law Disability Discrimination Welfare Benefits Universal Credit Article 14 ECHR Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR +1 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TP

Claimant

AR

Claimant

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Defendant

Equality and Human Rights Commission

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the absence of additional disability premiums (SDP and EDP) in universal credit constitutes unlawful discrimination under Article 14 ECHR read with Article 1 of the First Protocol
  2. 2 Whether the implementation arrangements for universal credit, specifically the lack of transitional protection for certain disabled claimants, constitute unlawful discrimination under Article 14 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 was breached

Ratio Decidendi

The absence of additional disability premiums (SDP and EDP) in universal credit does not constitute unlawful discrimination, as any differential treatment is objectively justified by the legitimate aim of restructuring the welfare system. However, the implementation arrangements, specifically the lack of transitional protection for severely disabled persons who move to a different local housing authority area and are forced onto universal credit, result in unlawful discrimination contrary to Article 14 ECHR, as the differential treatment is not objectively justified and is based on status.

Court Disposition

Partially allowed

Orders

  • Declaration granted that the implementation arrangements for universal credit unlawfully discriminate against certain severely disabled persons contrary to Article 14 ECHR.
  • Permission to argue breach of the public sector equality duty refused.