High Court rule that retrospective legislation in the Cait Reilly Poundland case was unlawful.

Politics and Insights

564882_438358886199493_1982719183_n

High Court grants declaration of incompatibility of primary legislation with the right to a fair trial after damning assessment of the Department of Work and Pensions’ interference in ongoing cases.

Many thanks to Public Interest Lawyers UK & International Law
In a detailed and critical decision, Mrs Justice Lang considered a challenge brought by Caitlin Reilly and Daniel Hewstone against the 2013 Act following a “series of misjudgments by the DWP” (at [109]). In a previous case, brought by Public Interest Lawyers on Ms Reilly’s behalf, the Court of Appeal had ruled that the regulations introducing back-to-work schemes (the 2011 Regulations) – and sanctions for failing to take part in or meet requirements of the schemes – were unlawful and should be quashed (see the press release here). Following a challenge to emergency, retrospective legislation introduced to remedy mistakes made by the DWP in its ‘Back to Work’…

View original post 597 more words

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: