Tribunal practice
Tribunal practice issues relate to the responsibilities and powers of the tribunal - including its jurisdiction, principles of procedural justice, fairness and the duty on parties to cooperate, tribunal procedure rules, its inquisitorial function and standards of fact finding and reasoning. While there has been PIP case law concerning tribunal practice issues, case law from other benefits may also be relevant.
NB - in Scotland, adult disability payment is replacing personal independence payment and PIP claimants in Scotland will gradually be transferred to the new benefit and have appeal rights to the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland Social Security Chamber- see Appeals to the First tier Tribunal for Adult Disability Payment and Appeals to the Upper Tribunal for Adult Disability Payment.
Case law
Commentary: While tribunals are entitled to make observations of a claimant at a hearing, in [2015] UKUT 692 (AAC) a tribunal which used its observations to inform its conclusions in respect of most if not all of the prescribed activities and then failed to put these to the claimant, was held to have erred in law. [2017] UKUT 416 (AAC) also highlighted that, unless the Secretary of State has raised the issue of a less favourable decision in his submission, a tribunal must consciously consider whether to exercise its discretion before taking into account issues not raised by the appeal.
Add commentary or suggest an edit.
-
When extrapolating ability from activities that are not in descriptors, tribunal must use activities that are genuinely comparable to the ones being assessed
- [2024] UKUT 283 (AAC)
- UA-2024-000378-PIP
- JM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: [2024]
-
Tribunal’s failure to take account of Secretary of State’s pre-hearing PIP ‘offer’ of additional point-scoring descriptors amounted to an error of law
- [2024] UKUT 282 (AAC)
- UA-2023-001476-PIP
- TL v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
-
Tribunal must consider totality of evidence, make sufficient findings of fact to resolve conflicts, and state which evidence it prefers and why
- [2024] UKUT 271 (AAC)
- UA-2024-000612-PIP
- MB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
-
Tribunal’s blanket refusal to consider evidence pertinent to risk and safety that post-dated PIP decision under appeal amounted to error of law
- [2024] UKUT90 90 (AAC)
- UA-2022-000388-PIP
- JS v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
-
When a claimant lacks capacity and has an appointee, a tribunal should consider the nature of the appointment and whether it provides evidence to support point-scoring PIP descriptors
- [2024] NI Com 27
- C17/23-24 (PIP)
- SB v Department for Communities (PIP)
-
Where a LEAP decision can be construed as a non-hopeless application for anytime official error revision, then the entirety of the decision can be considered on appeal
- [2023] UKUT 297 (AAC)
- CW v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunal’s failure to distinguish between evidence of learning difficulties and learning disability amounted to error of law
- [2023] UKUT 121 (AAC)
- UA-2023-000041-PIP
- PW by his appointee v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
-
Tribunal must identify grounds for revision or supersession used by the DWP in undertaking a LEAP review in order to establish claimant’s rights to challenge decision
- [2023] UKUT 95 (AAC)
- UA/2022/001000/PIP
- DB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Medical tribunal member using a ‘brisk and business-like’ approach was in keeping with Social Entitlement Chamber’s inquisitorial ethos
- [2022] UKUT 349 (AAC)
- UA-2021-001936-PIP
- GJ v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunal correctly assessed that claimant could not establish ‘exceptional circumstances’ to enable PIP appeal, prompted by an unsuccessful LEAP review, outside 13-month absolute time limit
- [2022] UKUT 334 (AAC)
- UA-2021-001099-CPIP
- GJ v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tick box answers in PIP2 questionnaire cannot be used by First-tier Tribunal as a proxy to obviate the need to make findings about the frequency of a claimant’s difficulties
- [2022] UKUT 316 (AAC)
- UA-2021-000723-PIP
- AW v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
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
- MH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Obligation on tribunal to explain why it decided against awarding more points for a PIP activity when a higher award had been recommended in the DWP’s written submission
- [2022] UKUT 32 (AAC)
- CPIP/737/2021
- LH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunals should consider Practice Direction relating to vulnerable adults when assessing whether it is reasonable for a claimant with mental health problems to participate in a telephone hearing
- [2022] UKUT 24 (AAC)
- CPIP/729/2021
- AS v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunal’s decision to make a closed period PIP award breached rules of natural justice as DWP failed to notify it of the claimant’s attempt to withdraw their later claim
- [2022] UKUT 13 (AAC)
- CPIP/904/2021
- VO v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Extent of tribunal’s obligation to take into account Secretary of State’s changed view after making pre-hearing PIP ‘offer’, when decision under appeal remains the unrevised decision
- [2021] UKUT 161 (AAC)
- CPIP/506/2020
- DO v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Whether tribunal is always obliged to put perceived inconsistencies in evidence to claimant / whether tribunal is always obliged to make specific findings on regulation 4(2A) criteria
- [2021] UKUT 140 (AAC)
- CPIP/1495/2020
- SM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
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
- CM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Whether tribunal properly concluded that entitlement to any rate of PIP was issue raised by appeal of supersession decision that only reduced entitlement / proceeding with appeal hearing in absence of presenting officer who had been directed to attend
- [2020] UKUT 156 (AAC)
- CPIP/2152/2019
- DT v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Unfair to proceed with tribunal hearing where putative appointee was not permitted to participate fully / application for leave to appeal should be put before a judge
- [2020] UKUT 109 (AAC)
- CPIP/2336/2019
- SB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunal unable to disapply legislation with unintended lacuna relating to revision or supersession of PIP awards in DLA transfer cases where claimant aged over 65 / extra-statutory payment made to claimant
- [2020] UKUT 107 (AAC)
- CPIP/1962/2018
- RJ v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Attempts by First-tier Tribunals to appeal-proof decisions by use of a ‘protective essay’ in their statements of reasons are an improper attempt to discourage claimants from exercising their right to seek permission to appeal
- [2020] UKUT 19 (AAC)
- CPIP/2722/2018
- CH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Importance of representatives indicating that special arrangements needed to help vulnerable adult participate in tribunal proceedings / need for representatives to make it clear if they wish to give evidence themselves
- [2020] UKUT 17 (AAC)
- CPIP/1328/2019
- JE v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunal’s inconsistent reporting of how it relied on claimant’s evidence amounts to error of law / observations on use of standard phrase ‘in particular’ in decision notices
- [2019] UKUT 324 (AAC)
- CPIP/2901/2018
- AA v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Period over which a tribunal has jurisdiction in a PIP appeal where subsequent fresh PIP claim has been decided / whether telephone claim is valid if ‘all the information required to determine the claim’ is not provided during call
- [2019] UKUT 318 (AAC)
- CPIP/2948/2018
- GG v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Remittance of case where it was the tribunal and not the decision maker who made the first decision
- [2019] UKUT 279 (AAC)
- CPIP/1172/2018
- JW v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
A tribunal’s failure to consider adjustments to assist a vulnerable claimant give evidence amounted to error of law / whether reference to definition of vulnerable adult in Practice Direction is ambulatory
- [2019] UKUT 207 (AAC)
- [2020] AACR 4
- CPIP/1271/2018
- RT v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunal in breach of duty of fairness to claimant in failing to take steps to rectify inadequacies in Secretary of State’s appeal response
- [2019] UKUT 204 (AAC)
- CPIP/580/2018
- TM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunal should not have relied exclusively on claimant’s ability to drive when assessing PIP mobility activity 1 / effect of conflict between decision notice and statement of reasons
- [2019] UKUT 181 (AAC)
- CPIP/2477/2018
- JC v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunal is required to provide very clear reasons if it dismisses appeal after claimant rejects a preliminary award ‘offer’
- [2019] UKUT 42 (AAC)
- CPIP/2086/2018
- KMN v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunals should question a healthcare professional’s failure to conduct a mental function assessment in reliance on what a claimant says
- [2018] UKUT 131 (AAC)
- CPIP/13/2018
- MS v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
A tribunal’s reasons must respond to the claimant’s arguments when they do not coincide with individual PIP activities
- [2018] UKUT 93 (AAC)
- CPIP/3058/2017
- MM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Adequacy of personal independence payment appeal responses that do not refer to a full list of descriptors
- [2018] UKUT 57 (AAC)
- CPIP/1261/2017
- LH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
- Tribunal’s duty to explain relevance of PIP claimant’s caring responsibilities if referring to them
- [2017] UKUT 493 (AAC)
- CPIP/1950/2017
- PB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunal should consider whether to review a decision before considering permission to appeal / tribunal should exercise discretion before taking into account issue not raised by appeal
- [2017] UKUT 416 (AAC)
- CPIP/863/2017
- GA v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Standard of fact finding required by tribunals considering good reason for failing to attend or participate in PIP consultations
- [2017] UKUT 363 (AAC)
- CPIP/662/2017
- SY v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Having warned claimant of risk of her award being reduced on appeal, tribunal can rely on representative to advise on the appropriate action
- [2016] UKUT 540 (AAC)
- CPIP/1423/2015
- MW v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
-
Tribunals need not consider other descriptors once sufficient points have been added to award the enhanced rate of a PIP component
- [2016] UKUT 444 (AAC)
- CPIP/2337/2016
- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v GP (PIP)
-
Delay in mandatory reconsideration / Appeal process meant claimant was denied reasonable opportunity to present his case
- [2016] UKUT 36 (AAC)
- CPIP/2329/2015
- MM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
-
Tribunal erred by relying on its observations of the claimant’s communication skills without informing him
- [2015] UKUT 692 (AAC)
- CPIP/2433/2015
- ID v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions