*R (on the application of SG v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions)

Social Security – Benefit. The claimants challenged the Government's introduction of a cap on welfare benefits on the basis that the Benefit Cap (Housing Benefit) Regulations 2012, SI 2012/2994, which had implemented the cap, discriminated unjustifiable between men and women, contrary to art 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights and art 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention. The Divisional Court dismissed the claimants' judicial review challenge. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed their appeal. The Supreme Court, in dismissing the claimants' appeal, held that, giving due weight to the assessment of the Government and Parliament, the court was not persuaded that the Regulations were incompatible with art 14 of the Convention. The Regulations pursued legitimate aims and, as the question of proportionality involved controversial issues of social and economic policy, the determination of which was pre-eminently the function of democratically elected institutions, it was necessary for the court to give due weight to the considered assessment made by those institutions. It was unnecessary for the court to decide whether the question of whether there had been a breach of art 3(1) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Category: