This is the text of a post I dput on the old Discussion Forum just before the temporary shutdown of Rightsnet on Monday. As no one was able to see it, here it is again:

The lack of appeal rights against refusal of JSA SHPs for 16 & 17 year olds is a longstanding injustice which perpetuates poor practice within DWP when it occurs, disempowers and alienates young people and makes it difficult for advisers to enforce peoples' rights.

Tribunals are sometimes accepting jurisdiction on matters where formal appeal rights don't exist, on the ground that Art 6 of the ECHR gives people a right to an independent hearing. For example, in the latest Adviser magazine there is a discussion about CIS/540/2002 where it was held that the lack of a right appeal on the question of evidence and information to support a claim breaches Article 6 and how tribunals are now accepting this as authority to hear appeals on this otherwise non-appealable matter.

Has anyone thought of taking an SHP refusal to tribunal on this point? Has anyone tried this since the ECHR was given legal force? If so, what happened?

Incidentally, presumably similar arguments could arise about the lack of a right of appeal on Tax Credit overpayments, refusal of NINOs and Social Fund refusals.

CIS/540/2002 was reasoned on the basis that Article 6 applies beacuse under earlier versions of the reg in question there WAS a right of appeal. Effectively saying that the breach of Article 6 was the removal of appeal rights, rather than simply the absence of them.
I don't think there's ever been a right of appeal against SHP decisions, and the Courts generally seem to feel that the availibility of JR is usually enough to satisfy Article 6.
The argument might work with Tax Credit overpayments, (we're waiting for a suitable case to try it), but I don't think it will work withthe other examples.