Eight Year Old vs Home Office | Denying Family Benefits

An 8-year-old British boy has made an application to the High Court against the Home Office over its policy of denying his family (and other families) access to the welfare safety net.

The boy is arguing that the Home Office’s no recourse to public funds (NRPF) policy is unlawful. The NRPF policy was introduced in 2012. The NRPF policy affects different groups of migrants (whether they have to leave to remain or not) and can prevent them from accessing benefits and other forms of social support. As part of the government’s “hostile environment”, which affects different groups of migrants (whether they have to leave to remain or not).


The boy’s mother arrived in the UK in 2009 and she was granted leave to remain. The boy’s mother works as a low-paid carer. The boy, who was born in the UK, has been forced to move schools due to the uncertainty of his mother’s position, and his mother continues to struggle to support them both.


The boy has said that not only is the policy unlawful, but that the risks have only increased since the Coronavirus pandemic, making families become destitute. This then impacts on the family’s ability to take public health precautions, which increases the exposure, and which will then increase the risk of spreading the virus.


This shows that failure to protect the most vulnerable is a failure to protect us all as a nation. Let’s see how this case progresses…


The information provided in this article is not intended to constitute legal advice and you should take full and comprehensive legal advice on your individual circumstances by a fully qualified Solicitor before you embark on any course of action.




Emma Aslett

Penn Chambers Solicitors

0207 183 459


#NRPF #FamilyBenefits #HomeOffice #CaseStudy #EmmaAslett #PennChambers #PennChambersSolicitors #PennGroup