We have enormous sympathy and the greatest respect for those who have acted with such determination and industry on behalf of the claimant; the case has been conducted on behalf of the claimant with great skill and very considerable restraint and economy….They have substantially succeeded on the issue… and in that success they have sustained a very important public interest under the Convention that otherwise might have gone by default.  We cannot stress too highly our indebtedness to the claimant’s legal team and the necessity for the highest quality of legal representation in cases involving such difficult issues relating to important matters of real public interest.  R (Ali Zaki Mousa (No.2)) v Secretary of State for Defence [2013] EWHC 2941(Admin). Judgment dated 02.10.2013

Rt Hon Sir John Thomas and Honourable Mr Justice Silber
 
 

Judgment delivered on Government’s “Back to Work” schemes – Stripping of Benefits Unlawful

Today in a mixed judgment, the High Court held that the Regulations[1] under which the Government has created many of its flagship “Back to Work” schemes are lawful but that the decision of the Department of Work and Pensions (the DWP) to strip our client of his benefits for six months for refusing to undertake compulsory work was unlawful.

The case was brought by Cait Reilly who participated in the "sector based work academy" scheme against her wishes and Jamie Wilson who refused to participate in the “Community Action Programme” when he was told that he had to work, cleaning furniture, without pay for 30 hours per week for six months. Mr Wilson objected to carrying out compulsory unpaid labour. In May 2012 Mr Wilson was informed that as a result of his failure to participate in the scheme he was to be stripped of his Jobseeker’s Allowance for six months.

In a decision that has potentially far-reaching consequences the Judge held that the decision to strip our client of his benefits for six months was unlawful because the DWP failed, as required by law, to provide information to him about the consequences of not participating in the scheme. Mr Wilson received the DWP’s standard form letters requiring his attendance on the Community Action Programme. These letters, which have been sent out to thousands of other people mandating their attendance on such schemes, failed to comply with the basic notice requirements that would allow the DWP to lawfully impose benefit sanctions.

Over the last year, across the country, tens of thousands of people have been stripped of their benefits and must now be entitled to reimbursement by the DWP.

Tessa Gregory of Public Interest Lawyers stated:

“As of January 2012, over 22,000 people[2] had been stripped of their benefits for failing to participate in the Work Programme alone. That figure must now have doubled. Today’s decision should mean that many of those subjected to benefit sanctions will be entitled to reimbursement by the Department of Work and Pensions. It is truly extraordinary that the Government has found itself in this position by failing to provide basic information to those affected. 

We welcome the Court’s ruling on this issue but we continue to maintain that the Regulations themselves are unlawful and ought to be quashed. We are seeking  permission to appeal the Court’s findings in this regard.”

 


[1] Jobseeker’s Allowance (Employment, Skills and Enterprise) Regulations 2011

 
 
See also:
 
 
Judgment


Other stories

Click on a story to read

  Al Sweady Inquiry - Closing Written Submissions for the Iraqi Core Participants...
  Phil Shiner on Russia Today talking about British army ‘torture’...
  PIL launch a new Military Justice Unit...
  Radio Times: Chaplain on Marine convicted of Taliban murder: ‘I would probably have shot him too’...
  Phil Shiner to feature on BBC programme about 'Marine A'...
  PIL welcomes peers rejection of proposed changes to ‘statelessness’ laws...
  Open Society Justice Initiative:UK Must Heed Warnings over Statelessness Measure...
  The Guardian: Birmingham joins San Francisco and Oslo in global green cities club...
  The Law Society Gazette: Fog of War...
  PIL's response to the Immigration Bill and statelessness...
  The Birmingham Mail: Lawyer: 'Still Questions to Answer' over Claims British Troops Shot 20 Iraqi M...
  The Independent: Using Statelessness as a Weapon Must be Rejected...
  PIL's concerns about the changes to the Prison Rules...
  Socialist Worker: Al-Sweady Inquiry...
  PIL response to Defence Committee's Report on Remotely Piloted Air Systems...
  PIL rebuttal to The Sun article today – “Spoils of War: Iraq Murder Slurs Lawyers in Ł2.5m Payday”...
  Phil Shiner: International Lawyer of the Year 2014...
  PIL Press Release: Al Sweady Inquiry ...
  Save Lincolnshire Libraries...
  The Guardian: Soldiers were under bombardment in Iraq, al-Sweady inquiry told...
  The Guardian: British army 'blocked investigation into treatment of Iraqi prisoners'...
  Tony Benn dies...