R (DA and DS) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2019] UKSC 21
Ratio Decidendi
The benefit cap, which limits total household welfare payments, does not constitute unlawful discrimination against lone parents and their children under Article 14 ECHR, as the government is entitled to a wide margin of appreciation in matters of economic and social policy.
ਤੱਥ
Single mothers with several children challenged the benefit cap on the ground that it disproportionately affected women (who were more likely to be lone parents) and children. They argued it constituted indirect sex discrimination and violated children's rights under Article 3(1) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
ਫੈਸਲੇ ਦਾ ਸਾਰ
The Supreme Court held (by a 5–2 majority) that the benefit cap did not violate Article 14 ECHR. The majority held that the cap pursued the legitimate aim of incentivising work and promoting fairness between working households and benefit recipients. The wide margin of appreciation afforded to the government in matters of social and economic policy meant the measure was not manifestly without reasonable foundation.
ਮੁੱਖ ਹਵਾਲੇ
"In the field of welfare benefits, the government is entitled to a wide margin of appreciation. The court should not substitute its own view of what is fair for that of the legislature."
— Lord Wilson
ਬਾਅਦ ਦਾ ਇਲਾਜ
Confirmed the wide margin of appreciation in welfare benefit challenges.
The dissenting judgments of Lady Hale and Lord Kerr, emphasising children's best interests, have been influential in academic and policy discussions.