![[2024] UKUT 185 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
The decisions by the Secretary of State and the First-tier Tribunal
The decisions by the Secretary of State and the First-tier Tribunal
However, the DWP’s decision-maker awarded the Appellant just two points for PIP daily living descriptor 5b (“needs to use an aid or appliance to be able to manage toilet needs or incontinence”). Accordingly the Appellant’s PIP claim was refused. That disallowance decision was also upheld following a mandatory reconsideration.
The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) subsequently confirmed the outcome of the DWP disallowance decision on the Appellant’s claim for PIP, scoring him at an aggregate of four points for daily living activities 5b (2 points) and 9b (2 points). It therefore likewise made no award of either component. The Appellant (Mr S) took issue with the FTT’s decision to refuse his claim to the daily living component, especially in relation to activity 5 (managing toilet needs or incontinence).
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal made on 21 February 2023 under number SC007/22/01185 was made in error of law. Under section 12(2)(a)
- The Upper Tribunal’s decision in summary and what happens next
- The background to this appeal to the Upper Tribunal
- The decisions by the Secretary of State and the First-tier Tribunal
- The Upper Tribunal’s grant of permission to appeal
- The proceedings before the Upper Tribunal
- The Upper Tribunal remakes the original decision under appeal
- The Appellant’s later PIP claim
- Conclusions