R (SC, CB and 8 children) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2021] UKSC 26
Independent editorial summary — not the official judgment. Read the full judgment via the source link.
Ratio Decidendi
The two-child limit on the child element of Universal Credit and Child Tax Credit does not violate Article 14 ECHR or Article 3 UNCRC. The 'manifestly without reasonable foundation' test applies to welfare benefit measures of general application, and the government is entitled to a broad margin of appreciation.
Facts
Claimants challenged the policy limiting the child element of Universal Credit and Child Tax Credit to the first two children in a household. They argued the policy discriminated against larger families and was incompatible with children's rights under the UNCRC and ECHR.
Judgment Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed the challenge. Lord Reed clarified the framework for assessing discrimination in welfare cases, confirming the 'manifestly without reasonable foundation' (MWRF) test. The court held that the two-child limit was rationally connected to its aims of fiscal responsibility and behavioural incentives, and fell within the government's margin of appreciation.
Key Quotes
"In the light of that jurisprudence as it currently stands, it remains the position that a low intensity of review is generally appropriate, other things being equal, in cases concerned with judgments of social and economic policy in the field of welfare benefits and pensions, so that the judgment of the executive or legislature will generally be respected unless it is manifestly without reasonable foundation. Nevertheless, the intensity of the court’s scrutiny can be influenced by a wide range of factors, depending on the circumstances of the particular case, as indeed it would be if the court were applying the domestic test of reasonableness rather than the Convention test of proportionality."
— Lord Reed at [158](verbatim, verified against the judgment)
Subsequent Treatment
Definitive statement of the MWRF test in UK welfare benefit discrimination challenges.
The framework has been applied in subsequent challenges to benefits policies, including the benefit cap and sanctions regimes.
What To Do Next
Get Professional Help