Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Disabled women more than twice as likely to experience domestic abuse
The latest data from the Office of National Statistics shows that, in the year ending March 2020, around 1 in 7 (14.3%) disabled people aged 16 to 59 years experienced any form of domestic abuse in...
The President of the Family Division endorses Public Law Working Group report
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has published a message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, in which the President endorses the publication of the President’s...
HMCTS updates online divorce services guidance
HM Courts and Tribunals Service have recently updated the online divorce services guidance with the addition of guides for deemed and dispensed service applications, alternative service...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
The suspension, during lockdown, of prison visits for children: was it lawful?
Jake Richards, 9 Gough ChambersThis article argues that the suspension on prison visits during this period and the deficiency of measures to mitigate the impact of this on family life and to protect...
View all articles
Authors

BENEFITS: Humphreys v Commissioner for HM Revenue and Customs [2010] EWCA Civ 56

Oct 27, 2018, 06:02 AM
Slug : humphreys-v-commissioner-for-hm-revenue-and-customs-2010-ewca-civ-56
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 3, 2010, 09:27 AM
Article ID : 86135

(Court of Appeal; President of Queen's Bench Division, Richards and Goldring LJJ)

The parents had separated but shared the care of children for 3 and 4 days a week respectively. One of the otherwise eligible parents was denied child tax credit on the basis that the parent was a 'minority carer'. The issue in the case was whether a minority carer rule was indirectly discriminatory on grounds of sex.

The court reviewed the decision in Hockenjos and held that the Commissioners had established sufficient justification for adhering to a system of single payment of child tax credit.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from