CUTS to the Winter Fuel Payment (WFP) for over 10 million UK citizens of pensionable age – including 900,000 Scots – is now subject to legal challenge in Scotland’s Supreme Court, the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

The challenge has been brought on behalf of a Coatbridge couple who, like so many people of pensionable age, will miss out on the WFP despite being of modest means.

With energy bills going up by 10% tomorrow, this is a policy that will spell disaster for pensioners already struggling with bills.

READ MORE: Two Coatbridge pensioners 'intend to sue' Scottish Government

Glasgow’s Govan Law Centre is instructed in the challenge, which was announced in Edinburgh last Thursday, with my colleagues Rachel Moon and Lorna Walker in attendance with our clients.

I’ve spent over two weeks researching and drafting the petition for judicial review.

There are two grounds of challenge. That the UK and Scottish governments failed to exercise duties under section 149 of the 2010 Equality Act before making decisions to cut the WFP and failed to carry out an equality impact assessment (EQIA) in accordance with their 2010 Act duties.

Separately, they failed to undertake any consultation with persons of pensionable age at common law before/while formulating their policy decisions.

The failure to consider the health and wellbeing impact of WFP cuts and give rigorous thought of how to mitigate adverse health impacts is a serious failure of legal process.

The UK government’s chief medical officer said in his annual report last year: “Cold homes and fuel poverty are directly linked to excess winter deaths.”

Vulnerable elderly people on relatively low incomes will be unable to heat their homes adequately without the WFP. As a direct result, because they are cold, more elderly people will die because of these cuts.

Research conducted by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation in 2017 found that means-testing the WFP for older households on benefits could put the lives of 3,850 people at risk.

READ MORE: I saw The Undertones at O2 Academy in Glasgow - my verdict

When cold, people’s platelets get higher, they vasoconstrict and their blood pressure goes up, putting them at risk of stroke or heart attack. When vulnerable elderly people are exposed to the cold their lungs become inflamed, which puts them at risk of pneumonia or chest infection.

The inability to reasonably heat a home makes people with chronic pulmonary obstructive disease more likely to suffer exacerbations.

Muscle strength is worse in people who are cold, particularly elderly people. That reduces their ability to complete the activities of daily living independently and it makes them more likely to fall.

What are the implications of WFP cuts for additional household accidents and the need for more people to visit their GP or A&E hospital departments?

Last week, the Scottish government laid its own regulations before the Scottish Parliament for WFP cuts – to be passed by 19 November – and to be known as the Pension Age Winter Heating Payment (PAWHP).

READ MORE: I saw Cannibal Corpse at Barrowlands in Glasgow - my verdict

There are a number of competency problems with the Scottish EQIA. It postdates the decision to means test the PAWHP. Second, it fails to examine the health impact of cuts or consider how these can be mitigated.

Third, it’s a rehash of the old work done when the Scottish government was going to introduce a universal payment – no relevant evidence gathering or consultation in relation to means testing has been undertaken.

These are issues for the Court to decide upon.