Court of Appeal rules that pre-settled status does not automatically lead to access to benefits

The Court of Appeal has handed down an important judgment on the interpretation of the UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement in Fertré v Vale of White Horse District Council [2025] EWCA Civ 1057, upholding the judgment of Jay J in the High Court.

The Court found that the grant of pre-settled status to EU citizens and their family members under post-Brexit arrangements does not automatically confer the right to equal treatment with UK citizens under the Withdrawal Agreement. The effect of this is that it is not unlawful to discriminate against those EU citizens and family members in setting criteria to access benefits. In this case, the particular benefit in question was housing assistance under the Housing Act 1996.

This means that whether or not a particular individual has the right to equal treatment depends on whether they meet the relevant conditions under the Withdrawal Agreement. If they do not meet those conditions, then although they have a lawful status under domestic law, it is not a status carrying the full panoply of rights under the Withdrawal Agreement.

The issue arose because the scheme set up by the UK after Brexit conferred pre-settled status on those who did not meet all the conditions under the Withdrawal Agreement.

The Court granted permission to intervene to five bodies, including the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, the Independent Monitoring Authority for the Citizens’ Rights Agreements and the3million.

Julia Smyth KC acted for the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, leading James Cornwell and Zoe Gannon.

Galina Ward KC acted for the Independent Monitoring Authority, leading Yaaser Vanderman.

Charles Bishop acted for the3million, led by Tom Royston and instructed by the Public Law Project.