8 November 2002

The Court of Appeal finds (in the case Howker v Secretary of State) that the social security advisory committee had been misled by the DSS (now DWP) and that removing the “substantial risk” clause was unlawful.

What: The Court of Appeal finds that the social security advisory committee had been misled by the DSS (now DWP), and that “this is the case whether or not officials from the Department acted innocently”. The ruling concerns the decision to remove the “substantial risk” clause. It concludes that the changes were unlawful. As a result the “significant risk” clause of regulation 27 reverts to the previous version, allowing people to be treated as incapable of work if there is a significant risk to the health of any person if they are found capable of work.

Why significant: Evidence of the DSS/DWP misleading the Social Security Advisory Committee and acting unlawfully. The claimant, Mr Howker, won the case, and the DWP was ordered to pay costs,.  The regulations were re-instated and the substantial risk safety net was once again recognised.