Decision Summary Information

Back to Results | Search Again | Most Recent Decisions

Neutral Citation Number:
Reported Number:	R(IS)22/95
File Number:	CIS 815 1992
Appellant:	Chief Adjudication Officer v. Ellis
Respondent:
Judge/Commissioner:	Mr M. J. Goodman
Date Of Decision:	15/02/1995
Date Added:	25/07/2002
Main Category:	Remunerative work
Main Subcategory:	Expectation of payment
Secondary Category:
Secondary Subcategory:
Notes:	Remunerative work - retail shop trading at a loss - whether attendance in shop was paid for or was in expectation of payment The claimant was refused income support by the adjudication officer because his wife was in remunerative employment within the meaning of section 20(3) of the Social Security Act 1986 and regulation 5(1) of the Income Support (General) Regulations 1987. The claimant appealed to a social security appeal tribunal which allowed the appeal because the claimants wife had been working without remuneration and had very little expectation of receiving remuneration. On appeal by the Chief Adjudication Officer the Commissioner upheld the tribunals decision on the facts. The Chief Adjudication Officer appealed to the Court of Appeal. Held, dismissing the appeal, that: 1. it is the time at which the work is done that is relevant; 2. it is the character of the work that is decisive; 3. profitability may become relevant if no payment is made and the question of expectation of payment arises; 4. Perrot v. Supplementary Benefits Commission [1980] 1 WLR 1153; [1980] 3 All ER 110 has to be adapted to a retail trade in that neither the price of goods sold nor the mark-up for profit is remuneration for work done; 5. a partner who receives drawings by way of wage or salary is engaged in remunerative work; 6. a broad view must be taken as to payments made from takings; 7. work done in realistic expectation of a share of the profits is remunerative work; 8. on the facts the claimant and his wife were carrying on the business without remuneration.
Decision(s) to Download:	IS22_95.doc