JT v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Judge Hemingway |
| Neutral Citation | [2018] UKUT 101 (AAC) |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) |
| Subject Matter | Personal independence payment – daily living activities,Personal independence payment – daily living activities - Activity 1: preparing food,Hemingway,M |
| Date | 26 March 2018 |
| Published date | 11 April 2018 |
JT v SSWP (PIP) [2018] UKUT 101 (AAC)
CPIP/3130/2017 1
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL Case No. CPIP/3130/2017
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER
Before: M R Hemingway: Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Decision: As the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (which it made on 25 July 2017 at
Newcastle-upon-Tyne under reference SC228/16/01619) involved the making
of an error of law, it is set aside. Further, the case is remitted to the
First-tier Tribunal for rehearing by a differently constituted panel.
This decision is made under section 12(2)(a) and (b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts
and Enforcement Act 2007.
DIRECTIONS:
A. The tribunal must (by way of an oral hearing) undertake a complete
reconsideration of the issues that are raised by the appeal and, subject to the
tribunal’s discretion under section 12(8)(a) of the Social Security Act 1998, any
other issues that merit consideration.
B. In particular, the tribunal must investigate and decide the claimant’s entitlement
to a personal independence payment on his claim that was made on
18 November 2016.
C. In doing so, the tribunal must not take account of circumstances that were not
obtaining at the date of the decision of the Secretary of State under appeal: see
section 12(8)(b) of the Social Security Act 1998. Later evidence is admissible,
provided that it relates to the time of the decision: R(DLA) 2 and 3/01.
D. The Secretary of State is to provide to the First-tier Tribunal, within one month
of the issuing of this decision of the Upper Tribunal, copies of all documentary
evidence which was used when the claimant was most recently awarded
disability living allowance. Alternatively, if the Secretary of State no longer
possesses such material or is otherwise unable to produce it, that should be
confirmed to the First-tier Tribunal, along with a full explanation, within the
same time scale.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The background
1. The claimant has epilepsy which the First-tier Tribunal (the tribunal) described as being
“uncontrolled”. There was evidence suggesting that he would experience something in the
order of two grand mal fits (also known as generalised tonic-clonic seizures) per week and a
variable number of petit mal fits (also known as absence seizures) within a similar period. He
also claimed to suffer from depression but was not, at any material time, receiving any medical
input in connection with any such condition. He has not claimed to have any other health
problems.
To continue reading
Request your trial