Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Upper Tribunal allowed a universal credit housing costs appeal, holding that a mandatory reconsideration had in substance occurred and the FTT should not have struck out the case.
The Upper Tribunal dismissed a universal credit appeal about a second bedroom for a child in equal shared care, rejecting indirect discrimination arguments.
Secretary of State for Work And Pensions v Mohammad [2011] EWCA Civ 1358 (23 November 2011)
The Court of Appeal held that Mrs Mohammad’s assumed liability for mortgage payments did not amount to taking out a qualifying loan under Schedule 3 ISGR.
The Court of Appeal held that a claimant who assumed responsibility for mortgage payments did not thereby take out or take over a loan for income support housing costs.
The Court of Appeal held that a six-year gap broke the necessary link between move, loan, and acquisition under paragraph 4(9), so housing costs were not payable.
Court of Appeal interpreted transitional housing-cost rules for income support, holding that only increases above the second benefit week level reduce the add back.
Arathoon v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions [2005] EWCA Civ 942 (24 June 2005)
The Court of Appeal held that transitional housing-cost “add back” protection is reduced only by increases measured against the second benefit week, not lower intervening weekly changes.
Secretary of State for Work & Pensions v W [2005] EWCA Civ 570 (18 May 2005)
The Court of Appeal held that “abandoned” in income support regulations can include constructive abandonment, and dismissed the Secretary of State’s appeal.
The Court of Appeal held that a woman was “abandoned” for income support purposes where her husband’s criminal conduct and resulting separation amounted to constructive abandonment.
Court of Appeal held that mortgage housing costs may be “necessarily incurred” even where the parent chose a shorter term, if the decision was within reasonable judgment.
Explore more
