FT v Perth and Kinross Council and Secretary of State for Work & Pensions (HB): [2019] UKUT 43 (AAC)

Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Poole on 30 January 2019

• From: HM Courts & Tribunals Service and Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)
• Published: 9 April 2019

• Categories: Housing and council tax benefits, Human rights law
• Sub-categories: Housing and council tax benefits - other, Human rights law - article 14 (non-discrimination)
• Judges: Poole, AI
• Decision date: 30 January 2019

Read the full decision in CSH/793/2014

Judicial Summary

This case is about the application to a gypsy traveller of the “bedroom tax”. It decides

1. The claimant’s chalet and pitch were not exempt from application of Regulation B13 of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006.

2. There was no violation of Articles 8 or 14 of the European Convention of Human Rights, essentially because the claimant had no objective need for additional bedrooms, and discretionary housing payments were made which mitigated in full any shortfall in housing benefit resulting from application of Regulation B13.

3. The tribunal did not err in law in its summary treatment of an unspecified criticism under equality legislation, later said to be about the Council’s public sector equality duty.

4. The tribunal erred in law in its approach to whether one of the additional rooms qualified as a bedroom under the 2006 Regulations, as it should have applied the approach in SSWP v City of Glasgow Council and IB [2017] CSIH 35

Published 9 April 2019