ZX, R (on the application of) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority & Anor
[2024] EWHC 1703 (Admin)
Peiris, R (on the application of) v First-Tier Tribunal & Ors
21 December 2023
[2023] EWCA Civ 1527
Court of Appeal
A father from Sri Lanka whose son was killed in the UK was denied government compensation because he didn't live in the UK. The court said it was okay to only give money to people who live in the UK because the government has to manage its money carefully, and this rule was properly made and approved by Parliament.
Key Facts
- •Mr Peiris, a Sri Lankan national not ordinarily resident in the UK, was refused a bereavement payment by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) after his son's murder in the UK.
- •The CICA's refusal was based on ineligibility criteria in the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012, requiring UK residency or British nationality.
- •Mr Peiris challenged the refusal as unlawful discrimination under Article 14 (in conjunction with Article 1 of the First Protocol) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
- •The Upper Tribunal dismissed the claim, finding the differential treatment objectively justified.
- •Mr Peiris appealed to the Court of Appeal, arguing the Upper Tribunal erred in its consideration of objective justification and the margin of appreciation.
- •The CICA subsequently awarded Mr Peiris funeral expenses separately.
Legal Principles
Article 14 ECHR prohibits discrimination in the enjoyment of Convention rights.
European Convention on Human Rights
Article 1 of the First Protocol ECHR protects the peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
European Convention on Human Rights
A nuanced approach to proportionality is required when considering measures of economic or social strategy, distinguishing between differences in treatment on grounds regarded as especially serious and those on other grounds.
R (SC) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2021] UKSC 26
In social welfare policy, courts should be slow to substitute their view for that of the decision-maker; greater judicial restraint is warranted where a statutory instrument has been reviewed by Parliament.
R (A) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority [2021] UKSC 27
Differential treatment based exclusively on nationality requires very weighty reasons for justification under Article 14 ECHR; however, basing eligibility for social welfare benefits on ordinary residence or nationality is not a 'suspect' ground generally requiring such weighty reasons.
Gaygusuz v Austria, Koua Poirrez v France, Ponomaryov v Bulgaria, R (A) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Peiris' appeal.
The differential treatment under the Scheme is objectively justified. The eligibility criteria pursue the legitimate aim of a sustainable compensation scheme, and there is a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the aim and the means employed. The Upper Tribunal correctly considered the margin of appreciation and did not err in its assessment of objective justification.
The CICA made a separate award of funeral expenses to Mr Peiris.
Funeral payments are distinct from bereavement payments and should not be refused solely on the basis of ineligibility for the latter.
Similar Cases
Daniel Richard Jwanczuk v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2023] EWCA Civ 1156
AXO, R (on the application of) v First-Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber)
[2024] EWCA Civ 226
C7 v Secrtary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWCA Civ 265
Joyce Oji, R (on the application of) v The Director of Legal Aid Casework
[2024] EWHC 1281 (Admin)