SM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Judge Poole, QC |
| Neutral Citation | [2019] UKUT 292 (AAC) |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) |
| Subject Matter | Personal independence payment – daily living activities,Personal independence payment – daily living activities - Activity 9: engaging with other people face to face,Poole,AI |
| Date | 18 September 2019 |
| Published date | 03 October 2019 |
SM v SSWP (PIP)
[2019] UKUT 292 (AAC)
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL Appeal No. CSPIP/208/2019
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER
Before: Upper Tribunal Judge A I Poole QC
The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal. The decision of the First-
tier Tribunal made on 21 January 2019 was made in error of law. Under section
12(2)(a) and (b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 I set that
decision aside and remit the case to be reconsidered by a fresh tribunal in
accordance with the following directions.
DIRECTIONS
1. The case is to be reconsidered at an oral hearing. The members of the First-
tier Tribunal who are chosen to reconsider the case are not to be the same
as those who made the decision which has been set aside. The new
Tribunal should have regard to paragraphs 4-17 of this decision, the
grounds of appeal at page 137, and the submission of the Secretary of State
for Work and Pensions at pages 152-155, when reconsidering the case.
2. Parties may provide any further evidence upon which they wish to rely
before the First-tier Tribunal to the relevant HMCTS office, the deadline for
doing so being one month from the date of issue of this Decision. The new
tribunal will be looking at the claimant’s circumstances at the time that the
decision under appeal was made, that is 23 October 2017, as they applied
during the times covered by the required period condition under Part 3 of
the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013.
Any further evidence, to be relevant, should shed light on the position at
those times.
3. The new First-tier Tribunal is not bound in any way by the decision of the
previous tribunal. It will not be limited to the evidence and submissions
before the previous tribunal. It will consider matters afresh and it may reach
the same or a different conclusion 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.
REASONS
Background
1. This is a case about personal independence payment (“PIP”). The appellant
(the “claimant”) suffers from anxiety. On 29 December 2017 the claimant was found
by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (“SSWP”) not to be entitled to PIP,
as he scored no points in respect of daily living and mobility activities in Parts 2 and 3
To continue reading
Request your trial
1 cases
-
JT v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
...4(2A).” 25. In the light of those cases, Upper Tribunal Judge Poole QC said in SM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP) [2019] UKUT 292 (AAC) – In my opinion, and subject to the requirements of Regulation 7 dealt with in the next paragraph, descriptor 9d should be found to apply ......