Key Facts
- •KR appealed a First-tier Tribunal decision denying her Carer's Allowance due to exceeding the earnings limit.
- •KR worked under a zero-hours contract with fluctuating earnings.
- •The dispute centered on whether her earnings should be averaged under regulation 8(3) of the Computation of Earnings Regulations 1996.
- •The Secretary of State later supported the appeal, arguing the Tribunal erred in not applying regulation 8(3)(b).
Legal Principles
Calculation of weekly earnings for benefits when earnings fluctuate.
Social Security (Invalid Care Allowance) Regulations 1976, regulation 8(1)
Averaging of fluctuating earnings under regulation 8(3) of the Computation of Earnings Regulations 1996.
Computation of Earnings Regulations 1996, regulation 8(3)
Tribunal's role in exercising discretion granted to the Secretary of State.
AC v SSWP [2019] UKUT 267
Statutory interpretation to avoid unworkable or absurd results.
R(Edison First Power Ltd) v Central Valuation Officer [2003] UKHL 20
Treatment of expenses in calculating earnings.
Computation of Earnings Regulations 1996, regulation 9(1)(f) and (3)(a)
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by failing to apply the averaging provision of regulation 8(3)(b) and by not properly considering the treatment of expenses under regulation 9(1)(f) and (3)(a).
First-tier Tribunal decision set aside.
Errors of law in the application of regulations 8(3)(b), 9(1)(f) and (3)(a), and failure to properly exercise discretion.
Secretary of State's decisions of 5 January 2019 and 30 May 2019 set aside.
These decisions did not correctly apply the averaging under regulation 8(3)(b).
Remitted to the Secretary of State to redetermine KR's entitlement to Carer's Allowance.
Applying the correct interpretation of regulation 8(3)(b) and considering the expenses as per regulation 9(1)(f) and (3)(a).