GS -v- Department for Social Development (IS) [2012] NICom 284 (27 April 2012)

GS -v- Department for Social Development (IS) [2012] NICom 284 (27 April 2012)

The appellant was not entitled to income support from 21 June 2004 to 18 August 2006 as he possessed capital in excess of the prescribed limit; after 18 August 2006, the appellant did not possess capital in excess of the prescribed limit as the value of any chose in action was nil or significantly less than the threshold, and thus entitlement to income support resumed if other conditions were met.

Citation
[2012] NICom 284
Parties
Appellant: GS; Respondent: Department for Social Development
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
27 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Social Security Tribunal Decision / Commissioner's Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Income Support, Capital Disregards, Chose in Action, Supersession of Benefits, Valuation of Assets
Social Security Law Income Support Capital Disregards Chose in Action Supersession of Benefits Valuation of Assets

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GS

Appellant

Department for Social Development

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Social Security Tribunal Decision / Commissioner's Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether capital held by the appellant should be disregarded under Schedule 10 of the Income Support (General) Regulations (NI) 1987
  2. 2 Whether the appellant possessed actual or notional capital in excess of the prescribed limit
  3. 3 Whether a chose in action existed and its value for benefit purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was not entitled to income support from 21 June 2004 to 18 August 2006 as he possessed capital in excess of the prescribed limit; after 18 August 2006, the appellant did not possess capital in excess of the prescribed limit as the value of any chose in action was nil or significantly less than the threshold, and thus entitlement to income support resumed if other conditions were met.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Decision substituted: appellant not entitled to income support from 21 June 2004 to 18 August 2006.
  • Appellant entitled to income support from and including 18 August 2006, subject to meeting other conditions of entitlement.