CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP
CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP
NCN: [2024] UKUT 244 (AAC)
particular situation may prevent a provision expressed in more general terms from applying to the same situation (see AS v SSWP [2017] AACR 31 per Judge Bano at [8]-[9]). I consider that principle of statutory construction would apply in this case so that, if an item of clothing falls within the definition of “therapy” in the Regulations, any difficulty with it falls to be assessed by reference to the activity dealing with management of therapy rather than by reference to the more general activity of dressing/undressing.
Thirdly, however, I agree with the appellant that the fact that the appellant’s difficulties with putting on compression stockings fall to be considered under activity 3 does not mean that she cannot also be considered for points under activity 6. That is again for two reasons:
The Tribunal needs to consider whether she would meet any of the activity 6 descriptors if she were putting on ordinary socks rather than compression stockings; and
It is not clear to me on the basis of the material I have that her only difficulty with getting dressed is the compression stockings. The Tribunal needs to make the necessary findings of fact in relation to this activity to enable it to consider whether the appellant should be awarded any points against this activity.
Fourthly, the hypothetical situation posited by the appellant of a person choosing to wear compression stockings even though they have not been prescribed by a person listed in Part 1 of Schedule 1 does not arise on this case and I express no view on it, save to say that compression stockings that have not been prescribed could not constitute “therapy” within the meaning of the Regulations. The Tribunal would therefore need to consider the case law on activity 6 and whether compression stockings that someone chooses to wear for a particular reason would fall to be regarded as ‘normal’ clothing for the purposes of that activity.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved an error of law. Under section 12(2) (a), (b)(i) and (3) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforc
- These Directions may be supplemented by later directions by a Tribunal Caseworker, Tribunal Registrar or Judge in the Social Entitlement Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP
- Background
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP NCN: [2024] UKUT 244 (AAC)
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP NCN: [2024] UKUT 244 (AAC)
- Legal framework
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP NCN: [2024] UKUT 244 (AAC)
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP
- The grounds of appeal and the parties’ submissions
- Ground 1: assistance/aids required to put on compression stockings (activities 3 and 6)
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP
- Ground 2: Engaging with other people face to face (activity 9)
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP NCN: [2024] UKUT 244 (AAC)
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP NCN: [2024] UKUT 244 (AAC)
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP NCN: [2024] UKUT 244 (AAC)
- Ground 3: Proceeding with the hearing as a telephone hearing
- CF -v- SSWP (PIP) Appeal no. UA-2024-000104-PIP
- What happens next
- Conclusions
![[2024] UKUT 244 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)