British child living with her mother in the UK will not be entitled to DLA if her father is living and working in another EU State – recent ruling by Upper Tribunal.

26 Mar 2020 | William Ford

In AH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2020] UKUT 53 (AAC), the claimant and her parents are British citizens.  The parents separated in 2011 but are not divorced.  The father moved to live and work in Belgium.  In October 2013, the Claimant (the daughter) claimed Disability Living Allowance (DLA) when she was four years old.  The care component was awarded at the middle rate, but the award was later removed when the DWP became aware that the claimant’s father was living and working in Belgium.

The DWP issued a decision that in these circumstances there was no entitlement to DLA under section 72(7B) of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992, which provides that where the EU coordination rules apply, someone will not be entitled to an award of the care component of DLA unless the UK is the competent State to pay ‘sickness benefit’ (which is how the care component of DLA is classified under EU law).

The First-tier Tribunal allowed the claimant’s appeal against the decision on the basis that DLA should continue to be paid on a provisional basis, as the evidence showed that there was a dispute as to whether Belgium was the competent State.  The Secretary of State appealed to the Upper Tribunal.

Under Regulation (EC) 883/2004 the general rule is that the place where the claimant is in gainful employment or self-employment is the competent State (Art 11(3)(a)).  But for those who are not economically active, it is normally the State of residence (Art 11(3)(e)). The Upper Tribunal held an oral hearing to consider the position where a family member has competing derived rights, from both parents but on a different basis.  Here, the UK was the competent State for the mother based on residence.  But for the father the competent State was Belgium based on him being self-employed.

The Upper Tribunal set aside the First-tier Tribunal’s decision and held that the evidence from Belgium authorities did not go so far as to show a difference of views [19].  They went on to uphold the original decision to refuse DLA to the claimant.  UTJ Jacobs said the term “insured person” in Article 1(c) was intended to be a broad one and it covered the full range of potential social security claimants [28].

The Judge accepted the claimant’s argument that the issue of which right took priority could not be determined by the priority rules in Article 32, as these only deal with sickness benefits in kind [31].  The Judge however concluded that Article 21, on the payment of cash benefits, overrode the claimant’s right to benefit based on her mother.

Article 21 provides that an “insured person and members of his family” shall be entitled to cash benefits provided by the competent institution”.  The Judge said the “obvious purpose” of Article 21 was “to ensure that all members of the family can look to one State for their sickness benefits” [26].  Giving priority to the father based on his place of work would be consistent with the need for a claimant being subject to the legislation of one State only.  The Judge said that while this approach put the focus on an ‘insured person’ as an employed or self-employed person, this was consistent with the structure of Article 11, which gives priority to the place where a person is pursuing an activity as a self-employed or employed person under Article 11(3)(a) over the place where someone is resident in Article 11(3)(e) [34].

The Upper Tribunal also rejected the argument that section 72(7B) of the SSCBA 1992 put the claimant and her mother at a substantial disadvantage compared to cases in which a family pursued all of their activities in a single State [38].  The Judge held that the claimant’s challenge to s.72(7B) was “ultimately a financial one” but this conflicted with CJEU case-law to the effect that EU law cannot guarantee to an insured person that moving to another Member State will be neutral in terms of social security [39].  The Upper Tribunal also rejected an argument based on the general principle in EU law that the interests of a child should prevail could not be used to “subvert the core structure of Regulation 883/2004” [46], which is a carefully constructed set of conflict of law provisions.

Our client is considering an appeal to the Court of Appeal.

William Ford, Partner, Osbornes Law instructed barrister Adrian Berry and Desmond Rutledge from Garden Court Chambers “This is a disappointing decision that will cause significant hardship for my client and her family. We are now actively considering an  appeal to the Court of Appeal”

For full transcript of the decision in AH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2020] UKUT 53 (AAC) click here.

Share this article

Contact

Contact us today

For a free initial conversation call 020 7485 8811

Email us Send us an email and we’ll get back to you






    More from WilliamVIEW ALL

    1. 18.2.2022

      High Court decides on uplift to legacy benefits

      Statement on High Court decision on the Government’s failure to apply a £20 uplift to legacy benefits What was the...

      Read more
    2. 5.11.2021

      Council overturns unlawful housing policy

      Homeless teenager claims victory for more than 1,200 homeless people after forcing council to overturn unlawful housing policy A homeless teenager...

      Read more
    3. shoreditch london
      3.9.2021

      Homeless Teenager takes London Council to High Court

      A homeless teenager is taking a London council to the High Court for ‘unlawfully’ banning hundreds of homeless people from...

      Read more
    4. 19.8.2021

      Housing Disrepair Scandal in South London

      Following an investigation by ITV nearly 500 homes in the Eastfields Estate in Mitcham, south London, owned by the housing association...

      Read more
    5. 29.4.2021

      High Court challenge the denial of benefit increases...

      The High Court is to decide whether it was lawful of the Government not to give nearly 2million people on...

      Read more
    6. 8.4.2021

      Council to amend unlawful housing allocation banding process

      For the last 8 years Brent Council has stopped the majority of homeless applicants from bidding for rehousing, treating them as ‘...

      Read more
    7. 29.1.2021

      What does the national lockdown mean for possession...

      The coronavirus pandemic has caused disruption to all elements of life, and possession proceedings are no exception. The number of...

      Read more
    8. 23.12.2020

      EU Nationals with Pre-Settled Status entitled to benefits...

      Court Judgment means EU Nationals with Pre-Settled Status can access benefits and housing On 18 December 2020 the Court of Appeal handed...

      Read more
    9. 22.12.2020

      Young mother secures accommodation after illegal evictions during...

      Here at Osbornes we have seen illegal evictions on the increase during this global pandemic. Osbornes have been advising many...

      Read more
    10. 22.12.2020

      Osbornes applying to Supreme Court in housing possession...

      In the case of Gateway Housing Association –v- Begum (2) the Court of Appeal recently decided that a tenant must leave...

      Read more
    11. london apartments
      22.12.2020

      Housing disrepair issues resolved after three years

      Osbornes were instructed on behalf of a disabled tenant who had been decanted from her temporary accommodation for some three...

      Read more
    12. 22.12.2020

      Eviction from home of vulnerable man during lockdown...

      Osbornes were instructed just before the lockdown to prevent the eviction of a vulnerable man with capacity issues. He had...

      Read more
    13. 24.11.2020

      Is the delay in the Renters Reform Bill...

      There have been issues tenants have faced for a long time before pandemic; namely no fault evictions and the other...

      Read more
    14. 20.11.2020

      Up Up and away to the First Tier...

      This year we assisted in written representations for a welfare benefit case in the Upper Tribunal. This is a Housing...

      Read more
    15. 20.11.2020

      You are homeless because you are in shared...

      It is well established that shared facilities are not suitable for families with children as long term accommodation. The client...

      Read more
    16. 9.11.2020

      Case Summary: Private Tenant affected by leaks settles...

      Our client had a private sector tenancy for a flat located in a block owned by a local authority. Our...

      Read more
    17. 27.5.2020

      I am vulnerable and homeless but the Council...

      Homelessness law and procedure can be very complicated. We hope this blog gives you some helpful pointers but it is...

      Read more
    18. 4.5.2020

      No recourse to public funds in the time...

      Anyone working in the field of social welfare law will be familiar with the term “no recourse to public funds”....

      Read more
    19. 29.4.2020

      Case news: Housing benefit decision addresses issue of...

      The background You might be forgiven for thinking that the question of whether a course is full time or part...

      Read more
    20. 17.4.2020

      Harassment and Unlawful Evictions of Tenants during COVID-19...

      At these hugely challenging times, I thought it would be helpful to provide some insight for tenants facing harassment and...

      Read more
    21. 31.3.2020

      The Coronavirus Act 2020 and Social Care

      The Coronavirus Act 2020 (“the Act”) came into law on 25 March 2020 and passed sweeping emergency legislation that is unprecedented in peacetime....

      Read more
    22. london house
      30.3.2020

      I have a disrepair issue can I withhold...

      Withholding rent is not your best course of action. I see the logic in using the non-payment of rent as...

      Read more
    23. 27.3.2020

      COVID-19 – the impact on landlords of residential properties...

      From the 26th March 2020, landlords will have to give their tenants 3 months’ notice if they intend to seek possession compared...

      Read more
    24. 6.11.2019

      Universal Credit Claims and Personal Injury Compensation

      The general rule on entitlement to Universal Credit is that a person is not entitled if they have capital of...

      Read more

    VIEW ALL