![[2024] UKUT 170 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Heading
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL Appeal No.UA-2021-000742-AFCS
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER [2024] UKUT 170 (AAC)
On appeal from the First-tier Tribunal (WPAFCC)
Between:
N.C. (deceased)
Appellant
by
J.C.
Executrix
- v –
Secretary of State for Defence
Respondent
Before: Upper Tribunal Judge Wikeley
Hearing date: 25 April 2024
Decision date: 6 June 2024
Representation:
Appellant: Mr Michael Rawlinson KC and Ms Jasmine Skander of Counsel instructed by Irwin Mitchell LLP
Respondent: Mr Will Hays of Counsel, instructed by the Government Legal Department
DECISION
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the Appellant’s appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal issued on 4 January 2021, following the hearing on 21 December 2020 under file number A
- Introduction
- A very brief outline of the factual background to the appeal
- The Appellant’s AFCS claim
- The Secretary of State’s decision on the Appellant’s AFCS claim
- The Appellant’s appeal to the First-tier Tribunal
- The decision of the First-tier Tribunal
- The Upper Tribunal appeal
- The AFCS legislative framework
- The role of appellate review in appeals from a specialist first instance jurisdiction
- Ground 1
- The First-tier Tribunal’s approach to making findings on the basis of its own knowledge
- The Appellant’s other main written submissions in the context of Ground 1
- The Appellant’s other main oral submissions in the context of Ground 1
- Ground 3
- The non-fault based nature of the AFCS
- The causation test and JM v Secretary of State for Defence
- Key points from the three-judge panel’s decision in JM v Secretary of State for Defence
- The First-tier Tribunal’s approach to the decision in JM v SSD
- The Appellant’s challenge to the FTT’s approach to the decision in JM v SSD
- Pulling the threads together
- Conclusions