HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) with effect from 1 April 2011
Cases pending in the higher courts
Court of Appeal and Court of Session
To check the latest information on listing of appeals go to HM Court Service Listing Calendar 
.
Pending cases include:
Court of Appeal
Harrington v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
An insured person under Regulation 883/2004 is not necessarily someone who has rights by virtue of insurance or contributions. Article 21 applies to those persons and members of their family even if the benefits in question are not ones that the claimant is claiming in their own right and not by virtue of being a member of the family. An insured person who is pursuing employment has priority over one who is not. This result is consistent with freedom of movement. It is not inconsistent with EU law.
AH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (DLA)[2020] UKUT 53 (AAC)
The King on the application of Bui v The Secretary for Work and Pensions
Challenge to the policy of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions that she will not make payments of universal credit unless and until a claimant has a national insurance number as opposed to simply having applied for one (the ‘NINo Rule’).
R (Bui) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; R (Onakoya) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2022] UKUT 189 (AAC)
The King on the application of Onakoya v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Challenge to the policy of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions that she will not make payments of universal credit unless and until a claimant has a national insurance number as opposed to simply having applied for one (the ‘NINo Rule’).
R (Bui) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; R (Onakoya) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2022] UKUT 189 (AAC)
AM v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Regulation 26 of the Universal Credit etc (Claims and Payments) Regulations 2013 – being awarded Universal Credit prior to the date of claim - whether a claim has to be made for the one month period prior to the date of the claim for Universal Credit.
AM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (UC) [2022] UKUT 242 (AAC)
AR v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Guidance is sought regarding the application of the Regulations concerning the implementation of a deduction because the claimant inherited half of her late husband’s pension and therefore half of his GMP.
Unreported
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT
Whether the principles enshrined in the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights may apply in the United Kingdom under the Withdrawal Agreement and after the end of the Brexit Implementation Period – if those Charter principles do apply, in what circumstances, and how, should the decision of the The Court of Justice of the European Union in CG v Department for Communities (C-709/20) be applied to an individual benefit claim - when, if at all, is an individualised assessment needed under CG and what factors are relevant. The Upper Tribunal has given the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AT (Aire Centre and IMA intervening) UC [2022] UKUT 330 (AAC)
RN v First Tier Tribunal & Anr
Crime of violence; application of Annex B; place of Sexual Offences Act 2003; Can online ‘grooming’ be a crime of violence under the 2012 Scheme?
CICA v FTT and RC (CIC); RN v FTT and CICA (CIC) [2022] UKUT 103 (AAC)
Peiris v First Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) & Ors
The applicant, who is ordinarily resident in a country outside Europe with which the UK has no relevant treaty, is unable to claim compensation following the murder of his son, who was ordinarily resident in the UK when he was killed. Such a claim is excluded by paragraph 10 of the 2012 Scheme, which requires an applicant for compensation to satisfy eligibility requirements based on ordinary residence in the UK or various other factors, none of which the applicant could meet. The differential treatment of the applicant which that represents was justified if the matter is to be approached on the basis solely of a requirement imposed on an applicant for compensation. A failure to make differing provision (i.e. a Thlimmenos argument), by allowing reliance to be placed on the eligibility status of the deceased rather than of the applicant for compensation, likewise failed
MP v FTT and CICA (CIC) [2022] UKUT 91 (AAC)
The King (on the application of AXO, a child, by her litigation friend, JXO), v The First-Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) & Anr
Under para.49(1), any part of the payment made under the settlement had to be repaid to the CICA if it was a "payment in respect of the same injury".
R (AXO) v First-tier Tribunal (respondent) and Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (interested party) [2022] UKUT 265 (AAC)
Page last updated 28 March 2023
www.judiciary.gov.uk
If your search is of a legal nature, you will find rules, legislation, decisions etc. on this website.
