Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Workfare case dicta

Workfare case dicta

Postby megaman20 » Tue May 26, 2015 9:38 pm

In the somewhat recent workfare case the case was held in favor of the claimants.

However in regards to the human rights act the court unanimously agreed that workfare did not breach human rights.

Would i be correct to believe that
If the court had ruled in favor of the department of work and pensions it would have set a legally binding precedent that workfare does not breach the human rights act because this would have been a piece of reasoning which lead to the outcome.
but
because they ruled against the department of work and pensions the comments in regards to the human rights act are only obiter because saying that workfare does not breach human rights is not a reason to give a ruling against a workfare policy.

Note that for this question I am strictly interested only in if or not the comments in regards to the human rights act are obiter or ratio with the case taken on its own. The judges made reference to a number of EU court decisions - comments from one or more of these may be legally binding but i am not interested in this i am only interested in if or not the judges comments in the English case on their own amounted to a binding precedent.
megaman20
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue May 26, 2015 9:25 pm

Re: Workfare case dicta

Postby dls » Wed May 27, 2015 10:41 am

You fixate on this ratio decidendi business, but it is not as simple as that. Some of the most relied upon dicta are from dissenting opinions. There is often no bright line between the two.

That a ratio is binding does not mean that something not part of the ratio will not sometimes be taken as persuasive
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11868
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Workfare case dicta

Postby Hairyloon » Wed May 27, 2015 1:00 pm

megaman20 wrote:If the court had ruled in favor of the department of work and pensions it would have set a legally binding precedent that workfare does not breach the human rights act because this would have been a piece of reasoning which lead to the outcome.

Not necessarily: such a finding might have been specific to the application of the scheme to the individual case, which may have been due to a misapplication of the rules.
It is impossible to generalise on "what-ifs".
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9433
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.


Return to Benefits

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests