Appeal No. UA-2025-000949-ESA
THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
(ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER)
Between:
JR
Appellant
v
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Respondent
THE UPPER TRIBUNAL ORDERS that, without the permission of this Tribunal: No one shall publish or reveal the name or address of JR, who is the Appellant in these proceedings, or any information that would be likely to lead to the identification of her or any member of her family in connection with these proceedings. Any breach of this order is liable to be treated as a contempt of court and may be punishable by imprisonment, fine or other sanctions under section 25 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The maximum punishment that may be imposed is a sentence of two years’ imprisonment or an unlimited fine. |
Before: Upper Tribunal Judge Jacobs
Decided on 23 March 2026 without a hearing.
Representation:
Claimant: Not represented
Secretary of State: DMA Leeds
On appeal from the First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber):
Reference: SC236/23/00733
Decision date: 16 May 2024
Hearing: Sunderland
Summary: Tribunal procedure and practice (including Upper Tribunal) – statement of reasons (34.9)
Inadequate reasons for decision.
[Please note the Summary of Decision is included for the convenience of readers. It does not form part of the decision. The Decision and Reasons of the judge follow.]
Decision of Upper Tribunal
On appeal from the First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber)
Reference: | SC236/23/00733 |
Decision date: | 16 May 2024 |
Hearing: | Sunderland |
As the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of an error in point of law, it is SET ASIDE under section 12(2)(a) and (b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and the case is REMITTED to the tribunal for rehearing by a differently constituted panel.
DIRECTIONS:
The tribunal must undertake a complete reconsideration of the issues that are raised by the appeal and, subject to the tribunal’s discretion under section 12(8)(a) of the Social Security Act 1998, any other issues that merit consideration.
The reconsideration must be undertaken in accordance with KK v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2015] UKUT 417 (AAC).
In particular, the tribunal must investigate and decide the claimant’s entitlement to an employment and support allowance.
In doing so, the tribunal must not take account of circumstances that were not obtaining at the time of the Secretary of State’s decision: see section 12(8)(b) of the Social Security Act 1998. Later evidence is admissible, provided that it relates to the time of the decision: R(DLA) 2 and 3/01.
Reasons for Decision
JR appealed against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal. I gave permission to appeal, saying:
The issue for the tribunal was whether the claimant had limited capability for work-related activity. It found that she did not and, in particular, that she did not satisfy regulation 35.
The decision notice gives the date of the hearing as 16 May 2024. It merely records in paragraph 4 that ‘Regulation 35 did not apply.’
The written reasons give the date of hearing as 14 June 2023, which was the date of the Secretary of State’s decision, and were signed on 17 February 2025. Paragraph 29 deals with regulation 35, but contains a conclusion with no explanation. Paragraph 32 may be intended to deal with regulation 35, but (if it does) it is very sparse.
I proposed setting aside the tribunal’s decision and directing a hearing. Neither party has objected to that course of action. I have accordingly set the decision aside and directed a rehearing.
Authorised for issue | Edward Jacobs |