The Department of Social Protection must reconsider the decision to grant a single person's Supplementary Welfare Allowance to a separated father of four children, the High Court has ruled. Kevin McCormack cared for his four children full time prior to separating from his wife in 2011 and moving back to Dublin to seek employment.
Mr. McCormack applied for Supplementary Welfare Allowance in July 2012. In his application, Mr. McCormack sought the maximum available for one parent with three children. However, in August 2012, the Department refused his application for the maximum €900 sought because it was in excess of the €475 monthly limit for a single person. Mr. McCormack appealed to the Appeals Officer, but the application was disallowed in December 2012.
A solicitor on behalf of Mr. McCormack made an application to the Chief Appeals Officer requesting a review. In November 2013, the Chief Appeals Officer gave a reasoned written decision for rejecting the application to review the decision of the Appeals Officer:
Mr. McCormack applied for Supplementary Welfare Allowance in July 2012. In his application, Mr. McCormack sought the maximum available for one parent with three children. However, in August 2012, the Department refused his application for the maximum €900 sought because it was in excess of the €475 monthly limit for a single person. Mr. McCormack appealed to the Appeals Officer, but the application was disallowed in December 2012.
A solicitor on behalf of Mr. McCormack made an application to the Chief Appeals Officer requesting a review. In November 2013, the Chief Appeals Officer gave a reasoned written decision for rejecting the application to review the decision of the Appeals Officer:
[...] as the housing and other basic needs of the children were met by their primary carer and the applicant received no increase in respect of those children on his primary social welfare payment, they were not dependent on [Mr. McCormack] for support and could not be regarded as dependent children.
Ms. Justice Marie Baker found the decision making process of the Department was flawed in assessing the application because it only had regard to Mr. McCormack's accommodation needs without having regard to the complexity of his family circumstances:
I am satisfied that the decision making process was flawed as a matter of law in that the decision body took an erroneous view of the test it had to apply, and looked only to the accommodation needs of [Mr. McCormack] himself without having any regard to the complexity of his family relationships [...].
Ms. Justice Baker also found that the children could not be viewed as living primarily with one parent, or having one primary carer.
