Caselaw summaries

Personal independence payment – Activity 2 (taking nutrition) – whether dentures can be an ‘aid or appliance’ to be able to take nutrition

Less favourable decision – warning to claimant and adjournment – breach of natural justice

New evidence presented to Upper Tribunal – admissibility and whether can demonstrate error of law

Mobility – ability to plan and follow the route of a journey

Claimant with borderline learning disability – re Activity 2 (reading and understanding), ‘basic written information’ refers to very basic information, but not so basic as to be of no practical use or value

Mobility – where claimant has walked at an airport when undertaking a trip abroad

Tribunals – whether First-tier Tribunal, in considering refusal to award the claimant personal independence payment (PIP) on transfer from high rates of both components of disability living allowance (DLA), adequately explained its decision not to adjourn to get the DLA evidence

Tribunals – procedural irregularity leading to set-aside

Video surveillance evidence – authorisation for the surveillance marked ‘for judge only’ and not seen by other members of tribunal, claimant or representative

Supersession in light of MH v SSWP (PIP) [2016] UKUT 531 (AAC)