I am confused by earlier discussions on this topic and in light of Wilson. If I read Wilson R(H)7/06 correctly then if claimant on IS he is passported to full HB/CTB without jeopardising partner's visa conditions.

But what happens (as in my case) where IS/IBJSA not applicable so no passported HB/CTB and claimant simply wanting to seek HB/CTB? As I understand Wilson (paras 32 following) then an HB/CTB claim by one member of a couple is necessarily a claim "in repect of the partner" EXCEPT that the applicable amount is reduced to the single person amount: as a result no recourse to public funds by partner and partner therefore not in breach of visa condition.

Have I got it right and can nonPFA partner safely make a claim. Help please!! (NINO not an issue her)

The reason the claimant in Wilson did not succeed was because, although being on IS they would be passported to full HB, the claim was disallowed as he could not provide an NINO for his partner, who the court held he was making a claim in respect of.

For a non IS/JSA case I think there is no doubt that the claimant is making a claim in respect of his/her partner. There is no provision of the applicable amount to be restricted to that of a single person - that only applies in IS/JSA. A claim in the circumstances described is, it seems to me, a claim in breach of the public funds restriction. What effect that may have on the partner's immigration situation is another matter entirely. Without more information on the immigration position it would be hard to advise. Also, since I sit as an immigration judge it would probably be better if I didn't!

Hope that is helpful.

Simon Ennals

Thank you for your reply. No longer confused... clear that there is indeed a potential problem for "no recourse" partner of HB/CTB claimant where no passported entitlement.
Sue