Jeanell Hippolyte v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWHC 2968 (Admin)
BK, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions & Anor
23 February 2023
[2023] EWHC 378 (KB)
High Court
A woman who escaped domestic abuse and got leave to stay in the UK said it was unfair that her paperwork didn't have her tax number on it like some other people's does. The judge said it wasn't unfair because the government has to make choices about how to use its resources, and this wasn't discriminatory.
Key Facts
- •The claimant, a Bangladeshi national, was granted leave to remain in the UK under the Destitute Domestic Violence Concession (DDVC).
- •Her biometric residence permit (BRP) did not include her National Insurance Number (NINo), unlike those granted under the NINo Alignment Scheme.
- •The claimant argued this omission amounted to unlawful discrimination under Articles 14 and 8 of the ECHR and Article 1 Protocol 1.
- •The claimant experienced delays in receiving Universal Credit (UC) due to the lack of NINo on her BRP.
- •The NINo Alignment Scheme includes Skilled Workers and refugees, providing them with NINos on their BRPs.
- •The DDVC primarily aims to remove the 'no recourse to public funds' condition, allowing access to benefits while applying for indefinite leave to remain.
Legal Principles
Article 14 ECHR prohibits discrimination in the enjoyment of Convention rights.
European Convention on Human Rights
Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR protects the peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
European Convention on Human Rights
Article 8 ECHR protects the right to respect for private and family life.
European Convention on Human Rights
Article 14 claims require demonstrating a difference in treatment relating to a Convention right, based on an identifiable characteristic, with no objective and reasonable justification.
R (SC) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2021] UKSC 26
In Article 14 claims concerning benefits, the test is whether, but for the complained-of condition, the applicant would have a right to the benefit under domestic law.
Stec v United Kingdom (2005) 41 EHRR SE18
Outcomes
Claim dismissed.
The claim failed on three grounds: the subject matter did not fall within the ambit of Article 14; the claimant was not in a relevantly similar situation to those in the NINo Alignment Scheme; and any difference in treatment was justified.
Similar Cases
AB, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWCA Civ 369
AB, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors.
[2023] EWHC 287 (Admin)
ASY & Ors v Home Office
[2024] EWCA Civ 373
Taulant Dani v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] UKUT 293 (IAC)