Protecting disabled people from unfair cuts to benefits

Was the removal of the Severe Disability Premium (SDP) and the Enhanced Disability Premium (EDP) for some groups of disabled people following the introduction of Universal Credit discriminatory contrary to Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)?  

TP and AR previously received Severe Disability Premium (SDP) and Enhanced Disability Premium (EDP) benefits but were migrated to Universal Credit when they moved to a different local authority area. Under Universal Credit (UC) they no longer received SDP/EDP, leaving them around £180 a month worse off.  Disabled people who moved within the same local authority area were not migrated to UC and continued to receive the higher level of legacy benefits payment including SDP and EDP. The High Court found that the difference in treatment between the two groups, who have the same support needs, constituted discrimination contrary to Article 14, read with Article 1 Protocol 1, of the ECHR.

This came within our core priority aim – upholding the system of equality and human rights protections. 

We intervened in these cases using our powers under section 30 of the Equality Act 2006.

After the High Court judgment in the first case, the Department for Work and Pensions introduced new regulations which proposed to pay disabled people who had been migrated to UC £80 in transitional payments rather than the £180 they had lost. A further challenge was then brought against this discrepancy. The High Court found that the Department for Work and Pensions' regulations were discriminatory.

The Court of Appeal agreed with the lower courts that the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions had unlawfully discriminated against this cohort of disabled people and upheld both High Court rulings.  

Thousands of disabled people now have more protection against a sudden and substantial benefit cut.