Milton Keynes disabled man continues court battle to gain hundreds of pounds backdated cash for benefit claimants all over the UK

Ian Barrow was one of four people nationally to challenge the decision of the government to give an extra £20 only to people receiving Universal Credit during the Covid pandemic.

He says people on legacy benefits should have been included too in the helping hand gesture.

Legacy benefits are those that came before Universal Credit and include Jobseeker's Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) and Income Support, often paid to people who are disabled or too sick to work.Ian claims Jobseekers Allowance and has been assessed as having limited capability for work-related activity.

Lawyers representing all four claimants went to the High Court last year to challenge the government’s failure to apply the £20 a week pandemic uplift to all those on legacy benefits.

The High Court dismissed the case, but this month the lawyers have been given permission to go to the Court of Appeal to challenge the decision.

If their appeal is successful, every legacy benefit claimant in the land could receive hundreds of pounds backdated.

Between March 30 2020 and October 5 2021 the standard allowance element of Universal Credit, intended to cover basic living costs, was increased by around £20 per week. There was no corresponding increase for those on legacy benefits.

Two of the claimants in the court battle were in receipt of ESA and the third and fourth Claimants were receiving IS and JSA.

Permission for the case to proceed was granted by the High Court in April 2021, and a final hearing was heard in November 2021.Ian and his fellow claimants argued that the ongoing difference in treatment was discriminatory, contrary to Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.The court accepted there were a greater proportion of disabled persons in receipt of legacy benefits compared to disabled persons receiving Universal Credit.

It was also accepted that disabled persons in receipt of legacy benefits were in a comparable position to disabled people in receipt of Universal Credit.But the Judge Mr Justice Swift ruled that the difference in treatment was justified.

It was felt that the increase to the standard allowance of UC was done with the intention of providing additional support to those people who lost their jobs as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and were forced to claim UC for the first time.

A spokesman for the lawyers said: “At the hearing, the court had been presented with evidence that those new to benefits tended to have higher rates of savings and were better able to meet the costs of the pandemic as a result.

"The judgment did acknowledge the very low level of income provided by legacy benefits and the hardship those in receipt of these benefits must have faced during the pandemic. However, Mr Justice Swift did not consider that this was legally relevant to the justification advanced by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.”The claimants were represented by William Ford of Osbornes Law, Jamie Burton QC of Doughty Street Chambers and Desmond Rutledge of Garden Court Chambers.

No date has yet been set for the appeal case.