The Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland has reversed the High Court’s finding that a woman with motor neuron disease suffered discrimination compared to others with life-limiting conditions who get immediate access to enhanced payments.
Back in October 2020, Mr. Justice McAliden in the High Court of Northern Ireland ruled that the difference in treatment for terminally ill claimants who cannot reasonably meet the six-month life expectancy rule in an application for Personal Independent Payments was discriminatory and granted the applicant leave for judicial review.
The applicant at the time was mother-of-three Lorraine Cox who had been diagnosed with Motor Neurone Disease in 2018 and had been given a life expectancy of between two and five years. She retired on medical grounds and applied for Personal Independent Payments. Under the special rules, one suffering from a terminal illness was entitled to an enhanced rate without having to undergo assessment provided that they could demonstrate that death was reasonably expected within six months. It took more than a year of tribunals, appeals, and face-to-face assessments before Ms. Cox qualified for the enhanced rate. Her counsel successfully argued that the current rules breached her right to freedom from discrimination under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
However, the Department for Communities and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions appealed the decision, contending that the trial judge erred in respect of his assessment that Ms. Cox had a status for the purposes of Article 14, that she was in an analogous group to others who have access to the special rules and that the difference in her treatment was justified.
The Court of Appeal agreed and reversed the High Court’s finding that Ms. Cox suffered discrimination compared to others with life-limiting conditions who get immediate access to enhanced payments. Lord Chief Justice Sir Declan Morgan looked at the definition of terminal illness and stated that the definition has the legitimate aim of ensuring those closest to death get immediate access to the benefits. He said that extending the special rules on terminal illness to those diagnosed with a progressive illness from which death can be reasonably be expected would change the basis for the award of the benefit and the court does not have jurisdiction to do that. The Court said, “these choices are for the political process and not for the courts.” The court allowed the appeal and dismissed the cross-appeal by Ms. Cox’s legal counsel.
Click here to read the Court of Appeal judgment.
Click here to read a detailed summary by Irish Legal News.