[2024] UKUT 223 (AAC)

Ground (1) is that the finding that SRU had no accidental exposure to known allergies is wrong: she had one in a coffee shop in Poland in 2019 and one at home in 2018 (and she only had an expired EpiPen because the GP had refused to represcribe it due to first consultant’s wrong diagnosis). And she had one on 16 May 2024.

Ground (1) discloses no arguable error of law. The First-tier Tribunal did not make a finding that SRU had had no accidental exposure to known allergies. In any event, accidental exposure to allergies in 2018 and 2019 did not show any needs in the required period, which began three months before 21 April 2023. The alleged incident of 16 May 2024 does not help either. It came after the First-tier Tribunal had made its decision and after the date of claim. The alleged incident was not relevant to the forward look that had to be taken as at the date of claim.