HS v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2024] UKUT 86 (AAC)
MR v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
10 July 2024
[2024] UKUT 199 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A person's appeal for disability benefits was unfairly rejected because the judge made assumptions about their health without giving them a chance to explain. The higher court ruled this was wrong and ordered a new hearing where the person will have a fair chance to present their case.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against First-tier Tribunal's refusal of LCW/LCWRA entitlement for Universal Credit.
- •First-tier Tribunal decided on the papers without an oral hearing.
- •Appellant argued the Tribunal erred in law by making assumptions about his credibility and walking ability.
- •Tribunal questioned the appellant's credibility without giving him an opportunity to respond.
- •Tribunal made assumptions about the distance the appellant parked from a supermarket before obtaining a Blue Badge.
- •Tribunal questioned the appellant's treatment in relation to his claimed condition.
- •Appellant was subsequently awarded LCW/LCWRA from 17 August 2023.
Legal Principles
Tribunals must give adequate reasons for deciding to proceed with a paper hearing.
JP v SSWP [2011] UKUT 459 (AAC)
Fairness requires that a tribunal adjourn to allow a claimant to respond to matters arising during deliberation which are material to the decision.
MH v Pembrokeshire County Council [2010] UKUT 28 AAC
Natural justice requires a fair hearing; it is contrary to natural justice if a case is decided on a basis a claimant had no fair chance to address.
CC v SSWP (ESA) [2019] UKUT 14 (AAC)
Drawing inferences about function from treatment requires caution; it may be an error of law to reject a claimant's evidence without giving them an opportunity to respond.
MM v SSWP (ESA) [2018] UKUT 446
Tribunal must consider the appellant's circumstances as they were at the time of the original decision under appeal.
Section 12(8)(b) of the Social Security Act 1998
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by failing to adjourn the paper hearing to allow the appellant to respond to concerns about his credibility and by failing to give adequate reasons for proceeding on the papers.
First-tier Tribunal decision set aside.
The Tribunal's errors were material and affected the fairness of the hearing and the outcome.
Case remitted for reconsideration by a fresh tribunal at an oral hearing.
To ensure a fair hearing and proper consideration of the evidence.
Similar Cases
NH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2024] UKUT 173 (AAC)
CF v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
[2024] UKUT 244 (AAC)
CU v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2024] UKUT 32 (AAC)
OU (mother and appointee for SRU) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2024] UKUT 223 (AAC)