MS v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2024] UKUT 185 (AAC)
QWH v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
27 October 2024
[2024] UKUT 339 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A person's PIP claim for help with daily tasks was rejected by a lower court. A higher court found mistakes in that decision, mainly due to insufficient evidence and incorrect legal interpretations. The case will be reviewed again by a different judge.
Key Facts
- •Mrs. QWH appealed a Personal Independence Payment (PIP) decision.
- •The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) awarded the mobility component but denied the daily living component.
- •Mrs. QWH appealed to the Upper Tribunal (UT) regarding the daily living component.
- •The UT found errors of law in the FTT's assessment of several daily living activities (preparing food, taking nutrition, reading and understanding, and dressing/undressing).
- •The UT's decision was based on the FTT's failure to adequately consider evidence, make proper findings of fact, and apply the correct legal test (over 50% of days).
Legal Principles
A descriptor is satisfied if it reflects one's ability for the majority of the time. The correct test is whether the descriptor is satisfied on over 50% of the days of the required period.
Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013, Regulation 7
Evidence post-dating the decision can be taken into account if it evidences the circumstances obtaining at the date of the decision (Secretary of State’s decision). It does not apply if evidence was supplied to the FTT after the FTT made its decision.
Social Security Act 1998, section 12(8)(b); Ladd v Marshall [1954] EWCA Civ 1
In PIP assessments, the claimant's ability to carry out an activity must be assessed based on whether they can do so safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly, and within a reasonable time period.
Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013, Regulation 4(2A)
Sitting on the bed to aid dressing does not attract PIP points.
CW v SSWP (PIP) [2016] UKUT 197 (AAC); AP v SSWP (PIP) [2016] UKUT 501 (AAC)
Outcomes
Mrs. QWH's appeal is allowed.
The FTT's decision regarding the daily living component contained errors of law.
The FTT decision is set aside concerning the daily living component.
The UT found several material errors of law in the FTT's reasoning and application of the relevant regulations, specifically regarding activities 1 (preparing food), 2 (taking nutrition), and 8 (reading and understanding).
The case is remitted to the FTT for a rehearing.
The UT deemed it necessary for the FTT to make findings of fact afresh in relation to all daily living activities, in accordance with the correct legal principles.