RR v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Empowering Tribunals to Enforce the Human Rights Act 1998 |
| |
| Authors: | Joe Tomlinson Alexandra Sinclair |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Senior Lecturer in Public Law, University of York;2. Research Director, Public Law Project. Both authors assisted Liberty, the Child Poverty Action Group, and the Public Law Project with research for an intervention in the RR Supreme Court hearing. We are grateful for their, and the legal team's, input in developing the analysis presented in this note. We also thank Jed Meers, Roger Masterman and Nick O'Brien for comments on a draft version of this note.;3. Fellow, Public Law Project. |
| |
| Abstract: | In RR v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions – follow-on litigation from the high-profile bedroom tax cases – the Supreme Court handed down a judgment which has significant implications for social security law, the interpretation of the Human Rights Act, the tribunals system, the judicial control of delegated legislation, and access to justice. Central, however, was the issue of the enforceability of human rights. We argue that the Supreme Court was not only justified in its interpretation of the Human Rights Act but that it has made the protections of the Act more easily enforceable. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
