R (on the application of Reilly (no.2) and Hewstone) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Mrs Justice Lang handed down judgment in this case concerning the Government's 'back to work schemes' and the retrospective legislation passed following the previous litigation on this issue (R (on the application of Reilly and another) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions – as to which see http://www.blackstonechambers.com/news/cases/r_on_the_17.html).

The Court concluded that the Jobseekers (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013 was incompatible with Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights, in that it had interfered with ongoing legal proceedings in favour of the State. The Court of Appeal had previously ruled that regulations introducing several back to work schemes had been ultra vires the Jobseeker's Act 1995 ([2013] 1 WLR 2239). Before an appeal was heard (and ultimately dismissed) by the Supreme Court, the 2013 Act sought to retrospectively validate those regulations as well as sanctions imposed on benefit claimants under its regime. It also determined thousands of pending appeals in statutory tribunals in favour of the Department of Work and Pensions. Mrs Justice Lang concluded that the 2013 Act had not been justified by sufficiently compelling reasons in the public interest and would therefore be the subject of a declaration of incompatibility under s.4 of the Human Rights Act 1998. However, she rejected a claim based on Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR on the basis that the right was not engaged by the legislation.

The full judgment can be read here: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2014/2182.html

Permission to appeal has been granted to both parties.

Tom Hickman and Ravi Mehta acted for Ms Reilly and Mr Hewstone.
James Eadie QC acted for the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.