Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2016] All ER (D) 202 (Jan)
Neutral Citation: [2016] UKSC 1
Court: Supreme Court
Judge:

Lord Neuberger P, Lady Hale DP, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed SCJJ

Representation Richard Drabble QC and Zoe Leventhal (instructed by Public Law Project) for M.
  Richard Drabble QC, David Carter and David Cowan (instructed by Miles and Partners LLP) for S.
  Jason Coppel QC and Amy Rogers (instructed by The Government Legal Department) for the Secretary of State.
  Ian Peacock for the Authority.
  Jason Coppel QC and Amy Rogers (instructed by The Government Legal Department) for the Secretary of States for Communities and Local Government as intervener.
  Marie Demetriou QC, Charles Banner, Jennifer MacLeod and Matthew Moriarty (instructed by Ashurst LLP) for The AIRE Centre as intervener.
Judgment Dates: 27 January 2016

Catchwords

Social Security - Benefit - Disqualification - Appellants being European Union citizens living in United Kingdom - First and second appellants being refused income support and housing assistance respectively - Whether applicable regulations infringing rights of appellants under Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union - Whether decisions regarding appellants invalid for failure to consider proportionality - Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union - Income Support (General) Regulations 1987, - Accession (Immigration and Worker Registration) Regulations 2004, - Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006, , , .

The Case

Social Security Benefit. The Supreme Court dismissed two appeals regarding the eligibility for benefits of European Union citizens living in the United Kingdom. It held that the applicable Regulations did not infringe the rights of the appellants under the Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union, and that it was not possible to invoke proportionality to entitle a person to have the right of residence and social assistance in another member state, save perhaps in extreme circumstances that did not apply to the appellants.

Practice Areas

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