![[2024] UKUT 405 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Conclusions
What decision should I make?
It follows from what I have said that the FTT erred in law, in relation to both the period 2007-2018, and the period from 12 November 2018 onwards. I therefore set its decision aside.
Given my conclusions above, there is no issue that is suitable for remittal, and I will exercise my power to “re-make” the decision under section 12(2)(b)(ii) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The decision that I make is that SE was entitled to CA from 12 November 2018.
I do not think that I need to substitute a decision in relation to the earlier period. My re-made decision stands in place of the decision dated any earlier decision which the Secretary of State made in on 4 April 2019, with effect that SE’s previous entitlement to CA from 2007 to 2018 remains in place.
Tim Buley KC
Deputy Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Authorised for issue on 5 December 2024
Name of Council representing appellant corrected by Upper Tribunal Judge Jacobs on 13 August 2025.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal made on 16 September 2021 was made in error of law. I set aside the decision under section 12(2)(a) o
- Introduction
- Relevant legal provisions
- Reg 1408/71
- Reg 883/2004
- Art 6 of the Implementing Reg
- Facts
- Harrington
- Issues
- Issue (i): 2007-2018 Period Academic
- 2007-2018 CA Entitlement (Reg 1408/71)
- CA Entitlement from 12 November 2018 onwards (Reg 833/2004)
- Wording and purpose of Arts 24, 25, and 29
- The history of the legislative provisions
- Free movement, and the importance of the single legislative system
- Other matters
- Conclusions