[2024] UKUT 381 (AAC)

Between:

AE

Appellant

- v -

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS

Respondent

Before: Upper Tribunal Judge Stout

Decided on consideration of the papers

Representation:

Appellant: In person

Respondent: Helen Hawley, DMA Leeds

On appeal from:

Tribunal: First-Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber)

Case No: SC065/23/00139

Digital Case No: 1668511418970213

Venue: Chester (in person)

Hearing Date: 16 January 2024

Anonymity: The appellant in this case is anonymised in accordance with the practice of the Upper Tribunal approved in Adams v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Green (CSM) [2017] UKUT 9 (AAC), [2017] AACR 28.

SUMMARY OF DECISION

PERSONAL INDEPENDENCE PAYMENT: PREPARING FOOD (42.1)

The claimant suffered from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). She was able to work, but her evidence was that work left her so tired that she was unable to cook a simple meal from fresh ingredients in the evening. Applying the guidance in TR v SSWP [2016] AAC 23 to the present case, the Tribunal needed to be satisfied that on the majority of days the appellant was able to prepare and cook a simple meal for herself at a time of day when it was reasonable for her to prepare a fresh cooked meal and after she had spent her day doing activities that it is reasonable for her to have undertaken. What is reasonable will be a question of fact in each case, but in this case it was reasonable for the appellant to work and reasonable for therefore to have a meal cooked from fresh ingredients in the evening. However, the Tribunal had perversely reasoned from the fact that the appellant could get herself to and from work that she was also functionally able to cook a simple meal in the evening. That failed to address the appellant’s case that her CFS meant she was too tired to do that. The Tribunal further erred in inferring from her acceptance that she could probably prepare a carrot when seated that she was capable of cooking a whole simple meal, and doing so on the majority of days in the week.

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