Permission to appeal and the Secretary of State
Permission to appeal and the Secretary of State
The claimant applied to the Tribunal for permission to appeal, but his application was correctly refused by a District Tribunal Judge. He, too, was bound by CH/4429/2006 and to have given permission to appeal would have been to force the Upper Tribunal to reconsider whether that decision was correct. That was a decision for the Upper Tribunal, not the First-tier Tribunal.
However, on 20 February 2019, the claimant renewed his application to the Upper Tribunal. I held a hearing of the application on 9 May 2019, at which the claimant was present but Gravesham—as was their choice to make—was not represented. Following that hearing, on 21 May 2019, I gave the claimant permission to appeal.
At the same time, I invited the Secretary of State to say whether she wished to be joined as second respondent to the appeal and directed that, if she did so wish, she would automatically be added as second respondent on receipt by the Upper Tribunal of the letter expressing that wish. Such a letter was received on 3 July 2019.
- Heading
- Section 1
- I set that decision aside and re-make it as follows
- REASONS
- The facts
- The total claimed overpayment was therefore £7,488.40
- Gravesham’s decisions
- The manuscript worksheet dated 23 January 2018 in the supporting papers states that the student finance figures were
- disregarding the Parents’ Learning Allowance (see paragraph 23 above) under regulation 59(4) of the Regulations
- Digression: Gravesham’s letter of 29 November 2017
- The relevant law
- Housing benefit legislation
- who have been assessed, or treated, as incapable of work for 196 days who have been assessed as, or treated as, having, limited capability for work for 196 days
- who are deaf and in respect of certain specified payments have been awarded from public funds
- The European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act
- The Equality Act
- CH/4429/2006
- The Tribunal’s decision
- Permission to appeal and the Secretary of State
- Grounds of Appeal
- The responses
- Hearing
- Discussion
- The interpretation of regulation 64: CH/4429/2006
- deciding whether to accept those terms; and if so completing the form and returning it to the Student Finance Authority
- The interpretation of regulation 64: Gravesham’s submissions
- The interpretation of regulation 64: the Secretary of State’s submissions
- Administrative inconvenience and the floodgates
- Discrimination
- The Upper Tribunal’s decision
- Conclusions
![[2023] UKUT 193 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)