Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

CK v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

[2024] UKUT 331 (AAC)
Someone's benefits stopped, but they weren't told until later. They claimed new benefits late. A court said the first decision wasn't explained well enough, so it needs to be decided again by a different judge.

Key Facts

  • Appellant's Working Tax Credit ceased on March 3, 2023, but notification wasn't received until March 14, 2023.
  • Appellant claimed Universal Credit (UC) on March 30, 2023.
  • The First-Tier Tribunal (FTT) refused to backdate the UC to March 3, 2023.
  • The FTT found the delay between March 3 and March 14 was justified, but not the delay after March 14.
  • The appellant sought help from her MP to understand the cessation of her Working Tax Credit.

Legal Principles

Regulation 26 of the Universal Credit etc. (Claims and Payments) Regulations 2013 governs backdating UC claims. Two conditions must be met: (a) a specified circumstance applies, and (b) the claimant couldn't reasonably have claimed earlier due to that circumstance.

Universal Credit etc (Claims and Payments) Regulations 2013 (SI 2013/380), Regulation 26

The specified circumstance doesn't need to apply continuously throughout the entire delay period; rather, the reasonableness of the delay due to the circumstance must be continuous.

Regulation 26(2)(a) and (b)

Reasons for a decision must be intelligible and adequate, enabling understanding of the decision's rationale and how issues were resolved (South Bucks District Council v Porter (No 2)).

South Bucks District Council v Porter (No 2) [2004] UKHL 33

Outcomes

The Upper Tribunal (UT) allowed the appeal.

The FTT's reasons were inadequate because they failed to adequately address whether the delay after March 14 was reasonably caused by the late notification of the Working Tax Credit expiry and whether the claimant could not reasonably have been expected to make a claim earlier due to the specified circumstances.

The FTT's decision was set aside.

The FTT erred in law by not providing adequate reasons for its decision regarding the reasonableness of the delay after March 14th.

The case was remitted to a new FTT for reconsideration.

To ensure a legally compliant decision with adequate reasons.

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.