Legal challenges or a Labour rebellion? Tom Royston dissects Government’s proposed cuts to disability benefits

23 April 2025

The Government’s proposed legislation, which it says will encourage a “pro-work system”, would narrow the criteria for people with disabilities to claim PIP. Credit: 1000 Words / Shutterstock.

As rebellion grows among Labour MPs over the Government’s proposed £4.8bn in disability benefits cuts, Garden Court North’s Tom Royston says there is no clear or obvious route to legally challenge the flagship elements of the policy.

The Government’s pending legislation would tighten the criteria for Personal Independence Payments (PIP) for people with disabilities, limiting the number of claimants.

Any substantive challenges to four key components of the pending legislation, which MPs will vote on in June, would “be likely to fall at various places along a spectrum from ‘hopeless’ to ‘challenging’”, Tom says.

Released in March 2025, the ‘Pathways to Work’ Green Paper outlines four main areas through which the Government will look to cut benefits spending:

(I) ‘Focussing PIP more on those with higher needs’: the proposal to require at least one four-point descriptor to be met to qualify for PIP;

(II) ‘Scrap the WCA’: the proposal to amend the process by which ill and disabled people can claim income replacement benefit, and the amount of money they receive;

(III) ‘New unemployment insurance’: the proposal to amalgamate contributory ESA and JSA into a single time limited contributory benefit;

(IV) ‘Delaying access to the UC health element until age 22’: not paying 18-21 PIP recipients any extra means tested element in Universal Credit.

Successful grounds for legal challenges in future? Tom’s analysis

Tom was appointed by solicitors Leigh Day to research legal challenges to the welfare reform proposals, drawing on his extensive experience in Garden Court North’s social security team. His appointment came at the request of Benefits and Work, an organisation which informs the public about benefits eligibility, and Inclusion London, a charity which supports Deaf and Disabled organisations across the capital.

In relation specifically to PIP, Tom examined the decision not to consult challenges under the Human Rights Act 1998 and challenges under the Equality Act 2010.

While the probability of any successful early challenge to the PIP four-point rule remains low, Tom stressed that there could be successful legal challenges in the future to elements of the above proposals.

These are likely to be to “contingent aspects of the proposals which emerge along the way, rather than to the elementary principles which were clear at the start”, according to Tom.

In other words, if the laws are enacted, the UK’s courts will have a major role in scrutinising the way they are interpreted and implemented, but not in altering basic foundations such as the PIP four-point test.

Tom also highlighted that almost nine out of ten standard rate daily living awards currently fail the proposed PIP four-point test.

Leigh Day solicitor Carolin Ott said: “As a law firm that has successfully represented many people with claims relating to unlawful actions by the DWP, we have been approached by a significant number of individuals who fear they will be affected by the proposed changes to disability benefits. We made it a priority to explore available avenues to assist them, and although Tom Royston’s assessment that there is at first glance no ‘silver bullet’ to challenge the flagship policies in the Green Paper will be disappointing, we will keep all available options under careful review, particularly as the specifics of relevant changes become clear.”

A Labour revolt?

Organisations including Benefits and Work have pointed to the brewing rebellion within the Labour Government over the proposed benefits cuts as a likelier route to success than any legal challenges.

This comes amid reports that the Cabinet may allow backbench MPs to abstain from the vote in June, a marked difference from the suspensions handed out to rebelling MPs over previous votes.

Labour MP for York Central Rachael Maskell, who is planning to vote against the legislation, has said: “You can’t compromise with a trade-off under which you say you will take more children from poor families out of poverty by placing more disabled people into poverty. That simply cannot be right.

“The government really does need to start listening to MPs, civil society and the population at large because there is really widespread opposition to these policies.”

Approximately 100 Labour MPs are considering their position on the vote, while an estimated 55 MPs are reportedly preparing to abstain.

MPs are also disgruntled at being asked to vote on the changes before they the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) reports on how effective they are likely to be at returning people to the workplace. The OBR will deal with this issue in its next forecast, due in autumn.

The Government’s Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall has said the proposed legislation would create a more “pro-work system” to encourage people to take up jobs, while protecting those who cannot work.

Tom was instructed by Carolin Ott from Leigh Day to research the Government’s ‘Pathways to Work’ Green Paper and offer advice about potential legal challenges to Inclusion London and Benefits and Work.

Additional media:

The Guardian – Ministers scramble to avoid Labour rebellion on disability benefit cuts

Benefits and Work – No legal ‘silver bullet’ to stop PIP proposals

GOV.UK – Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working Green Paper

The Guardian – ‘The whole policy is wrong’: rebellion among Labour MPs grows over £5bn benefits cut

For further information, please contact Alex Blair, Communications Manager at Garden Court North Chambers: ablair@gcnchambers.co.uk