Evidence
In determining entitlement to PIP, issues may arise concerning the validity or relevance of evidence. Where there is conflicting evidence, a decision has to be made as to which should be given the greater weight. Whilst there has been PIP case law concerning evidence issues, case law from other disability, incapacity and limited capacity for work benefits may also be relevant.
NB - in Scotland, adult disability payment is replacing personal independence payment and Social Security Scotland has provided guidance in relation to evidence in Gathering supporting information for Adult Disability Payment and Understanding and interpreting supporting information for Adult Disability Payment.
Case law
Commentary: Whilst we don't yet have any commentary in relation to the case law items below, we'd love to hear from you if you'd like to contribute. Send us a suggestion and we’d be happy to incorporate it here. | Add commentary or suggest an edit.
-
Tribunal’s approach to oral and written evidence from claimant, that it considered lacked credibility, was not an error of law
- [2022] UKUT 248 (AAC)
- UA-2021-000155-PIP
-
Tribunals hearing PIP appeals must be cautious not to infer from a claimant’s ability to engage with others in a very specific context that they would be able to carry out that task in other contexts
- [2021] UKUT 216 (AAC)
- CPIP/1627/2020
-
Adequacy of explanation required from tribunal for not seeking potentially relevant evidence from previous DLA award when making less advantageous PIP award
- [2021] UKUT 183 (AAC)
- CPIP/1748/2020
-
Whether new evidence about the distance a claimant covered when walking is admissible in an Upper Tribunal appeal in circumstances where a First-tier Tribunal incorrectly assessed that distance
- [2021] UKUT 35 (AAC)
- CPIP/2401/2019
-
Tribunals are not ordinarily required to give anything beyond brief reasons as to why they are not adjourning a PIP appeal in order to obtain DLA evidence
- [2020] UKUT 338 (AAC)
- CPIP/401/2020
-
Correct approach to assessing medical evidence if PIP assessment report has been carried out by publicly discredited Secretary of State appointed assessor
- [2020] UKUT 259 (AAC)
- CPIP/400/2017
-
Whether tribunal should have requested DLA evidence in PIP transfer claim appeal where there was no indication that claimant had ever been invited to request it
- [2020] UKUT 70 (AAC)
- CPIP/2836/2018
-
High Court holds that special rules for terminal illness, in case where claimant cannot demonstrate their death can be reasonably expected within six months, are ‘discriminatory’ and ‘manifestly without reasonable foundation’
- [2020] NIQB 53
-
Tribunal failed to give adequate consideration to seeking medical evidence from DLA award in PIP transfer case
- [2019] UKUT 150 (AAC)
-
Requirement for Secretary of State to provide relevant evidence of previous PIP claims / tribunal’s failure to pick up on ‘hints’ that there was a previous claim
- [2019] UKUT 27 (AAC)
- CPIP/2261/2018
-
Tribunal should consider whether there is need to separate out appellant’s direct evidence from that relayed by representative where there are inconsistencies
- [2018] UKUT 350 (AAC)
- CPIP/1035/2017
-
Tribunals are required to deal with evidence relating to ESA entitlement when used in support of a PIP appeal
- [2018] UKUT 216 (AAC)
- CPIP/1055/2018
-
What relevance a previous award of high rate mobility component DLA has for the ‘moving around’ descriptors under PIP
- [2018] UKUT 76 (AAC)
- CPIP/2748/2017
-
Both Secretary of State and representatives should provide relevant evidence to the tribunal / requirement for tribunal to explain different outcome on PIP renewal claim
- [2017] UKUT 506 (AAC)
- CPIP/2589/2017
-
Circumstances that may require a tribunal to seek evidence relating to a previous DLA claim when determining a PIP appeal / DLA and PIP document retention policies
- [2017] UKUT 415 (AAC)
- CPIP/973/2017
-
Evidence need not be medical to challenge a health care professional’s report / absence of complaint about health care professional is not significant
- [2017] UKUT 356 (AAC)
- CPIP/838/2017
- Circumstances when a tribunal should consider adjourning to seek further medical evidence
- [2017] UKUT 351 (AAC)
- CPIP/958/2017
-
Functional difficulties must arise from a physical or mental condition and not from other personal conditions such as childcare responsibilities
- [2017] UKUT 317 (AAC)
- CPIP/663/2017
-
Limits of tribunal’s inquisitorial role when assessing prescribed medication / mobility activity 2 and requirement to consider reasonable wishes of claimant to move around
- [2017] UKUT 154 (AAC)
- CPIP/3622/2016
-
Responsibilities of representatives when providing evidence to First-tier Tribunals on behalf of clients
- [2016] UKUT 533 (AAC)
- CPIP/2354/2016
-
Requirement for tribunals to submit all medical evidence to critical analysis / when should DLA evidence be required in determining a PIP transfer appeal
- [2016] UKUT 416 (AAC)
- CPIP/1042/2016
-
Descriptors including a ‘need’ for an aid or appliance, prompting, supervision or assistance, incorporate requirement to assess reasonableness of that need
- [2016] UKUT 250 (AAC)
- CPIP/1534/2015
- First-tier Tribunal has power to direct a medical assessment
- [2016] UKUT 212 (AAC)
- CPIP/3544/2015
-
General telephone enquiry can trigger PIP transfer claim / No obligation to supply DLA evidence on a PIP transfer appeal
- [2016] UKUT 117 (AAC)
- CPIP/2225/2015
- Tribunal must explain why it prefers medical evidence over claimant evidence
- [2016] UKUT 76 (AAC)
- CPIP/2651/2015
- Tribunal must resolve conflict between different sources of medical evidence
- [2015] UKUT 346 (AAC)
- UK/202/2015