← All Authorities
United Kingdom convention rightsgrounds irrationality

R (SC) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

[2021] UKSC 26
JurisdictionUnited Kingdom
CourtUK Supreme Court
Year2021
StatusBinding authority

Summary

UKSC held that the two-child limit on child tax credit engaged ECHR Art 14 but applied the manifestly without reasonable foundation test for welfare benefit decisions.

Key Principle

two-child limit on child tax credit; ECHR Art 14 discrimination; manifestly without reasonable foundation test for welfare benefits

Area of Law

human-rights

Related Cases

GA v Director of Immigration (Torture Claim) [2014] HKCFA 64

The statutory non-refoulement screening mechanism must afford high standards of procedural fairness, including legal representation, interpretation, and adequate opportunity to present the claim.

Ubamaka v Secretary for Security (Non-Refoulement) [2012] HKCFA 87

Article 3 HKBOR provides absolute protection against torture and cruel treatment, barring removal of any person facing a real risk of such treatment from HK.

Secretary for Security v Sakthevel Prabakar (Asylum Procedure) [2004] HKCFA 33

High standards of procedural fairness and anxious scrutiny apply to torture claim assessments, requiring the decision-maker to provide adequate reasons.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of R (SC) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and how it applies to your situation.

Explain R (SC) v Secretary of State fo...