[2024] UKUT 271 (AAC)

The appellant’s grounds of appeal as set out by her representative can be encapsulated in two main categories. Firstly, it is argued the FTT provided inadequate reasons for its decision and secondly, it failed to consider Regulation 4(2A) of the Social Security (PIP) Regulations 2013 specifically in relation to safely.

I granted permission to appeal on 31^st May 2024. In doing so I suggested the FTT may have been in error of law by failing to allow the claimant the opportunity to comment on observations the FTT made at the hearing relating to the claimant’s walking ability on which it appeared to rely. The respondent has forwarded a submission supporting the appeal.

I have decided this case on the papers as I consider I have sufficient information to do so fairly, bearing in mind the overriding objective. Neither party requested an oral hearing. I have provided full reasons as I consider it may be helpful in assisting Tribunals when dealing with observations made on the day of hearing, adopting a holistic approach to the assessment of evidence, (particularly where that evidence may be contradictory) and how this should be addressed in the written reasons.

The FTT concluded at paragraph 6 of its written reasons that: