Caselaw summaries

Personal independence payment (PIP) - supersessions – effective date of supersession and finality of decisions – ‘decision-based system of adjudication’

Personal independence payment (PIP) - ‘learning disability’ – error in treating it as synonymous with ‘learning difficulty’

Personal independence payment (PIP) after pension age – claimant was entitled to standard rates of daily living and mobility components

Personal independence payment (PIP) – right of appeal after LEAP [legal entitlements and administrative practice] exercise and refusal to revise

Tribunals – tribunal (in attempting to establish when the claimant had satisfied the ‘required period condition’ for personal independence payment (PIP)) had consulted with the duty district judge before making its decision

Activity 2 (taking nutrition) – claimant with anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), who as a result overindulged in food and had difficulty knowing when to stop eating

Tribunals – alleged ‘oppressive’ and cross-examination style’ questioning by medical member of tribunal - not accepted

Appeal outside the ‘absolute’ time limit – following a ‘LEAP’ decision refusing to revise for official error – ‘truly exceptional’ nature of right of an appeal outside the absolute time limit

Use of the ‘sometimes’ tick-box answer on PIP2 claim form – tribunal erred in taking claimant’s ticking of that box as proof that he could perform them on most days

Appeal to Upper Tribunal – the First-tier Tribunal decision, having been found to have erred in law (on the ground of inadequate reasons for refusal of appeal, given that previous appeal was successful), not necessary for the Upper Tribunal to address the appellant’s remaining grounds of appeal, despite request that they be addressed