173 mature students fight allowance cut

A CHALLENGE by 173 mature students to the axing, during the summer holidays, of a social welfare payment aimed at helping them pursue third-level education yesterday came before the High Court.

The students claim the Department of Social and Family Affairs, in an information booklet, from June 2002, on the Back to Education Allowance (BEA) scheme, offered them a BEA payable for the duration of degree and other courses, “including all holiday periods”.

The booklet featured the headline: “Helping You Return to Education” and outlined a scheme aimed at helping unemployed people, lone parents, disabled persons and others return to education.

It was particularly designed to promote second-chance education for those who had not been to third-level education, the court heard.

On that basis, the students claim, they began various courses, including third-level degrees and were admitted to the BEA scheme on January 1, 2003.

However, on March 26, 2003, the department announced that, following a review of the scheme, it had been decided that the BEA would not be paid for the summer holiday period, with effect from summer 2003.

The March 2003 decision was a breach of their legitimate expectation that the BEA would be paid for the duration of their courses, including summer holidays, the students claim.

Yesterday, Anthony Collins SC, for the 173 applicants, said they were not seeking damages but restitution, which would put them back in the position they had enjoyed prior to the March 2003 cut.

In an affidavit one of the applicants named as Michael Power, of Glencairn Drive, Leopardstown Valley, Dublin, said he had enrolled as a full-time mature student on a four-year science degree course at UCD, in September 2002.

The married father-of -four said he saw information about the Back to Education scheme in a booklet from the Department of Family and Social Affairs in June 2002.

He could not have gone to university, but for the scheme, he said. The booklet stated the allowance was payable for the duration of the course, including all holidays.

The judge heard Mr Power and others were involved in a campaign to reverse the March 2003 decision, which resulted in a reversal of the proposed withdrawal, in Budget 2004, but only in the case of post-graduate students.

Mr Power and others secured leave from the High Court, in February 2004, to bring their judicial review challenge.

In submissions, Eanna Molloy SC, for the minister, opposed the students’ application and argued it was brought outside the legal time limits.

The case concluded yesterday and Mr Justice McMenamim reserved judgment to February 28.