Caselaw summaries

Jurisdiction – strike out of appeal against DWP ‘letter’ which did not constitute a ‘decision’

Evidence – fairness – use of ‘closed questions’ to claimant

Tribunals – audio of tribunal hearing indicated it lasted for 16 minutes and tribunal spent just over four minutes dealing with claimant’s arguments for the daily living activities

Second claim while appeal pending – original claim refused and under appeal when second claim was made and refused

Appeal rights – mandatory reconsideration for official error – notification of relevant time limit for mandatory reconsideration any ground

Effective date of increased award made by tribunal following decision on supersession – claimant awarded enhanced rate mobility component on appeal

PIP mobility Activity 2 (‘Getting around’) – tribunal erred in failing to make adequate findings of fact regarding claimant’s walking ability, in particular regarding ability to walk ‘within a reasonable time period’ and ‘to an acceptable standard’

PIP daily living Activity 9 (‘Engaging with other people’) – important to take a holistic approach rather than focus on one area, such as the claimant’s employment

Personal independence payment (PIP) – chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and ability to cook a simple meal from fresh ingredients in the evening

PIP – young person with primary ciliary dyskinesia (PSD, a rare inherited lung disorder) previously entitled to low rate care component disability living allowance refused personal independence payment on transfer