Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2012] All ER (D) 124 (May)
Neutral Citation: [2012] UKSC 18
Court: Supreme Court
Judge:

Lord Walker, Lady Hale, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson and Lord Reed SCJJ
Representation Richard Drabble QC and Sasha Blackmore (instructed by Ford Simey LLP) for the father.
  Jason Coppel and Katherine Eddy (instructed by the Office of Revenue and Customs Commissioners) for the Revenue.
Judgment Dates: 16 May 2012

Catchwords

Social security - Child benefit - Entitlement to benefit - Claimant having care of children for three days per week - Claimant claiming child tax credit in respect of children - Defendant Revenue and Customs Commissioners refusing claim on basis that claimant minority carer - Appeal tribunal finding that relevant provisions giving rise to indirect discrimination against men - Revenue appealing - Upper Tribunal and Court of Appeal upholding Revenue' appeal - Claimant appealing to Supreme Court - Whether Court of Appeal erring - Whether relevant provision discriminatory - Whether discrimination objectively justified - Child Tax Credit Regulations 2002, .

The Case

Social security Child benefit. The Supreme Court, in dismissing a minority carer father's appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal, held that indirect discrimination against men flowing from the requirement, pursuant to the Child Tax Credit Regulations 2002, , that the payment of child tax credit, in respect of a child in shared care by two parents, was to be made to the parent with main responsibility for the child, was justified.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.

Lexis®Library

  • An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
  • The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
  • Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
  • Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases