Court Finds Benefits Cap Discriminates Against Disabled People's Carers

The Government Has Been Discriminating Against Disabled People Again

Iain Duncan Smith suffered defeat on Thursday when a High Court judge ruled that his plan to cap carers' benefits was discriminatory.

The ruling comes after two carers brought the case against the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) following concerns that the benefits cap would unfairly hurt those who care for their disabled children and relatives.

Carers are able to claim about £60 a week if they care for relatives. These claims, however, can be included in the £500 benefit cap.

Those who care for children or spouses are exempt from the benefits cap, but people who look after another adult, such as parents, grandparents or disabled children over the age of 18, have their benefits included in the £500 cap.

Open Image Modal

Iain Duncan Smith's policies discriminated against disabled people, court rules

On Thursday, the High Court ruled that family carers who receive Carer’s Allowance should be exempt from the benefit cap.

Campaigners have welcomed the decision, highlighting the damaging effects the cap would have had on carers looking after disabled relatives.

Rebecca Hilsenrath, chief executive at the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said: “We are pleased that the court has found the impact on disabled people of losing a family carer had not been properly considered.

“The effect could be profound and the loss of a trusted carer devastating.

“The substantial reduction of income could jeopardise the ability of those affected to continue to care for severely disabled relatives. The court noted that the Secretary of State did not provide any information to Parliament about the effect on disabled people if their family carer were unable to continue.

“The court also held that, rather than saving public money, it would cost considerably more for the care to be provided by local authorities or the NHS.”

The High Court ruled that the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions had indirectly discriminated against unpaid carers for disabled family members by failing to exempt them from the benefits cap.

The Court upheld the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s submission that carers’ Article 14 rights under the European Convention on Human Rights had been contravened by not considering the impact on disabled people.

A DWP spokesperson said: “We are pleased that the court agrees that the benefit cap pursues a legitimate and lawful aim.

“The Government values the important role of carers in society – and 98% are unaffected by the cap. We are considering the judgment and will respond in due course.”

Today's ruling comes after the government made a series of embarrassing u-turns during the Autumn Statement on Wednesday.

On Wednesday, the government also lost a "landmark" legal battle regarding the teaching of GCSE Religious Studies in schools

The court ruled yesterday that Education Secretary Nicky Morgan had made "an error in law" following complaints from families supported by British Humanist Association that priority had been given to religious views, particularly Buddhism, Christianity, Catholic Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism and Sikhism.

Six other times David Cameron's behaviour was found to be behaving unlawfully

6 Times The Government Was Caught 'Acting Unlawfully'
Derided for dodgy detentions(01 of06)
Open Image Modal
When the Government tried to institute fast-track migrant deportations last month, the High Court ruled such a system would constitute "structural unfairness". The process would have accelerated legal hearings and appeals, while keeping the individual detained at all times. It was ruled that applicants would not be able to prepare their case properly and lawyers would be put in an unfair position, leading to "serious procedural disadvantage". (credit:Gareth Fuller/PA Archive)
Castigated over closure(02 of06)
Open Image Modal
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt got a stinging result handed down by High Court judges in 2013, after it was found he unlawfully enforced cutbacks at Lewisham hospital in South London. Despite him insisting the move would have improved patient care, thousands of protestors celebrated at the announcement, their campaign group's representative in court saying: "This expensive waste of time for the government should serve as a wake up call that they cannot ride roughshod over the needs of the people." (credit:Peter Macdiarmid via Getty Images)
Legal aid lambasted(03 of06)
Open Image Modal
When significant cuts were made to the provision of legal aid back in September 2014, a new operation - Exceptional Case Funding - was introduced as a 'safety net' to protect access to judicial assistance. But a case bought to the High Court by 'I.S.' - an unnamed blind man with profound cognitive impairments, who was refused by the ECF - found that the system was unlawful, "deficient" and failing to provide assistance to the most needy. (credit:Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)
Berated over benefits(04 of06)
Open Image Modal
Lawyers and disability campaigners rejoiced in June after a High Court judge ruled that a long delay in paying disability benefit to two of the "most vulnerable people" was "unlawful" and "unacceptable". The individuals had to wait up to 13 months to be assessed to see whether they qualified to receive Personal Independence Payments. Originally it was estimated to take ten weeks maximum, but figures showed that after seven months 12,600 claimants were still waiting for a decision. (credit:Philip Toscano/PA Wire)
Cut down to size over copyright(05 of06)
Open Image Modal
After attempts to introduce private copyright rules back in October 2014, the Government was slapped down by the High Court eight months later for instituting the unlawful legislation. It said that allowing people who acquire legal copies of copyrighted works to make personal copies of the material without any compensation to the copyright holder was "nowhere near to being justified by the evidence that the [government] specifically accepted and endorsed". (credit:Horia Varlan/Flickr)
Rebuked over books(06 of06)
Open Image Modal
A prisoner who says she loved reading managed to win a High Court battle over ex-Justice Secretary Chris Grayling's ban on inmates receiving books from family and friends. Having been denied legal aid, lawyers offered to represent 56-year-old Barbara Gordon-Jones for free. Mr Justice Collins brandished the restriction on books as "unlawful". (credit:University of Macedonia - uom.gr/ Flickr)