TH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Judge Wikeley |
| Neutral Citation | [2017] UKUT 231 (AAC) |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) |
| Subject Matter | Personal independence payment – general,Revisions,supersessions,reviews,reviews - supersession: general,Wikeley,N |
| Date | 02 June 2017 |
| Published date | 13 June 2017 |
TH v SSWP (PIP)
[2017] UKUT 0231 (AAC)
CPIP/2621/2016 1
DECISION OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
(ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER)
The DECISION of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal by the Appellant.
The decision of the Bexleyheath First-tier Tribunal dated June 4, 2016 under file
reference SC168/16/00500 involves an error on a point of law. The First-tier
Tribunal’s decision is set aside.
The Upper Tribunal is not in a position to re-make the decision under appeal. It
therefore follows that the Appellant’s appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision
dated November 25, 2015 is remitted to be re-heard by a different First-tier Tribunal,
subject to the Directions below.
This decision is given under section 12(2)(a) and (b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts and
Enforcement Act 2007.
DIRECTIONS
The following directions apply to the hearing:
(1) The appeal should be considered at an oral hearing.
(2) The new First-tier Tribunal should not involve the tribunal judge or
members who were previously involved in considering this appeal on
June 4, 2016.
(3) The Appellant is reminded that the tribunal can only deal with the
appeal, including his health and other circumstances, as at the date of
the original decision by the Secretary of State under appeal (namely
November 25, 2015).
(4) If the Appellant has any further written evidence to put before the
tribunal, in particular medical evidence, this should be sent to the
regional tribunal office in Sutton within one month of the issue of this
decision. Any such further evidence will have to relate to the
circumstances as they were at the date of the decision of the
Secretary of State under appeal (see Direction (3) above).
(5) The new First-tier Tribunal is not bound in any way by the decision of
the previous tribunal. Depending on the findings of fact it makes, the
new tribunal may reach the same or a different outcome to the
previous tribunal.
These Directions may be supplemented by later directions by a Tribunal
Judge in the Social Entitlement Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal.
To continue reading
Request your trial
2 cases
-
GA v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
...supersession of PIP awards has been considered in a number of Upper Tribunal decisions, summarised most recently in TH v SSWP (PIP) [2017] UKUT 0231 (AAC). For present purposes it is sufficient to note that the FTT did not recognise that it was superseding a previous award. Moreover the FTT......
-
SC v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
...supersede. 28. The above point was illustrated by Upper Tribunal Judge Wikeley in TH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP) [2017] UKUT 0231 (AAC), where Judge Wikeley ‘…it was not simply enough to assume that the appearance of a new PIP assessment report provided an automatic gro......