Pensioners who are challenging a UK Government decision to cut the winter fuel payment would not have been eligible for it due to living in Scotland, a court has heard. The challenge was brought by Florence and Peter Fanning, from Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, who are represented by former SNP MP Joanna Cherry KC and Govan Law Centre at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.
The pensioners, who did not appear at a remote hearing in the case on Friday, are seeking to reverse the decision by Chancellor Rachel Reeves to remove the universality of the payment, which she announced on July 29, 2024. The court was told the allowance ceased to be given to Scottish pensioners in April 2024 and was replaced with a devolved benefit.
Attorney General Andrew Webster KC, representing the UK Government, known as the first respondent, said the Chancellor’s decision would not have applied to the Fannings due to devolution. James Mure KC represents the Scottish Government, known as the second respondent.
At a previous hearing, Ms Cherry attempted to cite it as a human rights case under Article 8 and Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and a challenge on irrationality, but both governments rejected this. Ms Cherry told the court on Friday the Fannings live on a combined household income of £2,065 per month.
She said no “statutory” consultation regarding the Equality Act 2010 had been carried out. Ms Cherry said: “The petitioners raised the petition within the policy decision to revoke the winter fuel payments, made on a Great Britain-wide basis, when the Chancellor announced the policy was to be cut.
