[2025] UKUT 220 (AAC)

Appeal No. UA-2024-001135-PIP

In The Upper Tribunal
Administrative Appeals Chamber

Between:

PZ

Appellant

-v-

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Respondent

Before: Upper Tribunal Judge Church

Decided on consideration of the papers

Representation:

Appellant: Rajinder Kainth, Central England Law Centre

Respondent: Eyituoyo Sakpa, Decision Making and Appeals (DMA) Leeds

On appeal from:

Tribunal: First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber)

Tribunal Case No.: SC015/23/00905

Digital Case No.: 1690883575997012

Tribunal Venue: Coventry

Decision Date: 19 April 2024

SUMMARY OF DECISION

34.2 Fair hearing; 43.1 Personal Independence Payment Mobility activity 1: planning and following journeys

The Upper Tribunal allowed the claimant’s appeal because the Tribunal’s irrelevant questions about the claimant’s immigration history and his motivation in coming to the UK from Slovakia indicated that it considered irrelevant factors when deciding to dismiss his appeal.

Its questioning about these irrelevant matters also gave rise to an appearance of bias.

Please note that 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