Legal action
Helping a couple to live in their home without restriction in the benefits they needed
Published: 13 November 2019
Last updated: 13 November 2019
What countries does this apply to?
Case details
| Protected Characteristic | Disability, Sex |
|---|---|
| Types of equality claim | Direct discrimination |
| Court or tribunal | Supreme Court |
| Decision has to be followed in | England, Scotland, Wales |
| Law applies in | England, Scotland, Wales |
| Case state | Concluded |
| Our involvement | Intervention (section 30 of the Equality Act 2006) |
| Outcome | Judgment |
| Areas of life | Living standards |
| Public sector equality duty | Yes |
| Human Rights law | Article 8: Respect for your private and family life, home and correspondence |
| Website | UK Supreme Court Blog |
Case name: RR v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
The appellant, RR, lived with his severely disabled partner in a two bedroomed rented social housing property for which he claimed housing benefit. The respondent local authority, Sefton Borough Council, applied regulation B13 and decided that, because they were a couple, they were only entitled to one bedroom.
The and his partner had their housing benefits limited under the so-called bedroom tax, but a judge at a tribunal found that the regulations were in breach of the couple’s rights under the Human Rights Act and dis-applied them.
RR appealed that his partner required a separate bedrooms because of her disabilities and her need to accommodate medical equipment and supplies.
Legal issue
Do social security tribunals have the power to provide a remedy to benefits claimants in situations where the application of regulations breach their human rights?
Why we were involved
This case came within our access to justice priority aim which was focused on ensuring that people can access redress when they are wronged.
What we did
We provided evidence to the court (intervened) using our powers under section 30 of the Equality Act 2006.
What happened
The court found that public authorities and tribunals can, and indeed must, dis-apply secondary legislation that is incompatible with Convention rights. In this case, the tribunal was right to dis-apply Regulation B13 of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006.
The bedroom tax was an unjustified discrimination on the ground of disability where there was a transparent need for an additional bedroom.
Who will benefit
The Supreme Court ruling clarified that social security tribunals have the power to disapply regulations which breach the Human Rights Act. This will benefit anyone whose human rights could be breached by regulations.
Date of hearing
Date concluded
Page updates
Published:
13 November 2019
Last updated:
13 November 2019