Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Mirela Plescan v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

[2023] EWCA Civ 870
Someone appealed a decision, then appealed the rejection of that appeal, and then appealed the rejection of *that* appeal. The court decided it *could* hear the third appeal, but only about whether the second appeal was handled fairly, not the original decision itself.

Key Facts

  • Mirela Plescan's PIP claim was partially refused by the First-tier Tribunal.
  • Permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal was refused.
  • Plescan's application to set aside the Upper Tribunal's refusal of permission was also refused.
  • Plescan appealed the refusal to set aside the decision to the Court of Appeal.
  • The Court of Appeal considered whether it had jurisdiction to hear this appeal.

Legal Principles

Right to appeal to the Upper Tribunal from First-tier Tribunal decisions (subject to permission).

Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, section 11

Right to appeal to the Court of Appeal from Upper Tribunal decisions (subject to permission and exclusions).

Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, section 13

Upper Tribunal's power to review its own decisions (with exclusions).

Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, section 10

Upper Tribunal's power to set aside its decisions on procedural grounds (rule 43).

Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, rule 43

Decisions on applications for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal are excluded decisions and are not appealable to the Court of Appeal.

Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, section 13(8)(c)

Outcomes

The Court of Appeal held it DOES have jurisdiction to hear appeals against the Upper Tribunal's refusal to set aside its decision refusing permission to appeal.

A decision to refuse to set aside a refusal of permission to appeal is not an 'excluded decision' under section 13(8) of the 2007 Act. It is a separate decision from the initial refusal of permission, and does not merge with it. The appeal is against the refusal to set aside, not the original refusal of permission.

Ms Plescan was granted 14 days to make further representations on why permission to appeal should be granted.

To allow Ms Plescan to present further arguments given the Court's determination of jurisdiction.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.