× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Residence issues  →  Thread

Self-employment and St Prix

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3117

Joined: 14 July 2014

About a year ago, Judge Ward heard two of the test cases about whether a self-employed person derives protection from St Prix (HMRC v HB & GP [2017] UKUT 11 (AAC)). There was some suggestion of staying that issue behind Gusa - which has now been decided and seems to support the argument that self-employed people can retain rights in the same way as workers.

Does anybody know whether we’re any further forward on this issue?

Martin Williams
forum member

Welfare rights advisor - CPAG, London

Send message

Total Posts: 769

Joined: 16 June 2010

Yes we are:


1. the case lost in the Court of Appeal: Hrabkova v SSWP [2017] EWCA Civ 794: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2017/794.rtf

2. we await permission to appeal in the Supreme Court- see our testcase page on this case here: http://www.cpag.org.uk/content/right-reside-self-employed

Gusa we would like to think helps- although that is for the Supreme Court to decide.

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3117

Joined: 14 July 2014

Thanks Martin - isn’t Hrabkova about derivative rights rather than St Prix rights though? Or is it conclusive for both issues?

Martin Williams
forum member

Welfare rights advisor - CPAG, London

Send message

Total Posts: 769

Joined: 16 June 2010

Yes- sorry Elliot.
It will not settle the St Prix question but should point the way to the correct position on that. I imagine the St Prix stuff could now be decided post Gusa but that Judges may want to say it should await the outcome of Hrabkova…..

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3117

Joined: 14 July 2014

Just in case anyone else is following this issue, the UT office has advised me that the remaining test case (CF/393/2016)  is down for hearing at Field House on 8 March.

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3117

Joined: 14 July 2014

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 3537

Joined: 14 March 2014

Martin Williams - 05 February 2018 06:05 PM

Yes we are:


1. the case lost in the Court of Appeal: Hrabkova v SSWP [2017] EWCA Civ 794: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2017/794.rtf

2. we await permission to appeal in the Supreme Court- see our testcase page on this case here: http://www.cpag.org.uk/content/right-reside-self-employed

Gusa we would like to think helps- although that is for the Supreme Court to decide.

Sadly permission to appeal has been refused-

Permission to appeal be refused because the application does not raise an arguable point of law of general public importance which ought to be considered at this time bearing in mind that the case has already been the subject of judicial decision and reviewed on appeal.

HB Anorak
forum member

Benefits consultant/trainer - hbanorak.co.uk, East London

Send message

Total Posts: 2895

Joined: 12 March 2013

So Gusa not a wide-ranging game changer for self-employed people after all.  And yet …

- I(EEA) Regs 2016 have just been amended to allow retention of self-employed right to reside when seeking work after working for less than one year, and when entering vocational training.  That goes further than Gusa on a narrow reading
- UT has asked European Court to say whether St Prix-style maternity breaks apply to the self-employed, which is outside the factual scope of Gusa

I think if the ECJ says yes to maternity breaks, the derivative right to reside also requires a fresh look and referral to the ECJ, if there is any point referring anything to the ECJ anymore by that time of course.