![[2025] UKUT 001 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Conclusions
Conclusion
I therefore conclude that the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involves an error of law. I allow the appeal and set aside the decision of the tribunal (TCEA 2007, section 12(2)(a)).
Nicholas Wikeley
Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Authorised for issue on 2 January 2025
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal by the Secretary of State. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal made on 30 December 2021 under file number SC242/21/02922 was made in error
- Introduction
- Preliminaries
- An outline of what is agreed and what is not agreed between the parties
- A summary of the parties’ positions
- The chronology of the three PIP claims in more detail
- The 2018 claim
- The 2020 claim
- The First-tier Tribunal’s decision in 2021
- The starting point
- The claimant’s route to the First-tier Tribunal
- Provisional conclusion on the decision of the First-tier Tribunal
- The official error issue
- Must a request expressly or implicitly identify official error as a ground for revision?
- The DWP’s decision on the 2018 claim and official error
- The DWP’s decision on the 2020 claim and official error
- The notification issue
- Conclusions