R (SC, CB and 8 children) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2021] UKSC 26
判决理由
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.
事实
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.
判决摘要
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.
关键引述
"The MWRF test is the appropriate standard of review when assessing measures of general economic or social policy in the context of Article 14 ECHR."
— Lord Reed
后续处理
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.