MR v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2024] UKUT 199 (AAC)
OU (mother and appointee for SRU) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
28 July 2024
[2024] UKUT 223 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A family appealed a decision denying their child disability benefits. The judge reviewing the appeal found the initial decision was correctly made and did not contain any legal mistakes. The judge also criticized a part of the initial process, suggesting the family had been wrongly pressured.
Key Facts
- •Application for permission to appeal (PtA) received on 24 May 2024 (deadline 10 June 2024).
- •Appeal concerns a First-tier Tribunal decision refusing Disability Living Allowance (DLA) for SRU.
- •Applicant raises four grounds of appeal, all relating to the Tribunal's assessment of SRU's needs.
- •The Upper Tribunal Judge refused permission to appeal and did not grant an oral hearing.
- •The First-tier Tribunal's Directions Notice requiring the applicant to confirm whether she wished for a Statement of Reasons is criticized as potentially improper.
Legal Principles
The 'period throughout which' test in section 72(1) for DLA does not require daily need, nor necessarily a majority of days in a week.
R(A) 2/74
A forward-looking assessment is required when determining DLA eligibility, considering circumstances at the date of claim.
Implicit in the decision
The Tribunal's assessment of the evidence and its preference for one witness's account over another are generally matters of fact and not reviewable on appeal unless there is an arguable error of law.
Implicit in the decision
Post-decision events are generally not relevant to an appeal against the decision.
Ladd v Marshall [1954] EWCA Civ 1
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008 (S.I. 2008/2685), rule 34(5) mandates the provision of a statement of reasons following a timely application.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008 (S.I. 2008/2685)
Outcomes
Permission to appeal refused.
No arguable error of law disclosed in the grounds of appeal. The First-tier Tribunal's findings were open to it on the evidence.
Oral hearing not granted.
Oral hearing would not change the merits of the application, as the grounds do not disclose an arguable error of law.