[2025] UKUT 252 (AAC)

The Secretary of State in a written submission of 13 June 2024 supports the appeal to the Upper Tribunal. In terms of the stated grounds on which permission to appeal was given, the core of the Secretary of State’s support is in the following terms:

“14.

The Tribunal noted due to the claimant’s health condition(s) (chronic fatigue syndrome) he “accepted that he can carry out the daily tasks in isolation from each other, with a rest before and afterwards. Sometimes his rest period would take a whole afternoon” and “18. The difference between his good days and bad days is the amount of rest he requires before and afterwards…”.

15.

In the findings section within the SOR the Tribunal noted:

“22.

Resting before carrying out a task is not part of that task, and no reason has been advanced why this is necessary.”

16.

Upon reading the SOR there appears to be insufficient findings made concerning the impact the claimants’ conditions may have on him particularly the chronic fatigue syndrome and the symptoms/difficulties he may face as a result. Arguably the Tribunal appear to have not sufficiently explored such matters nor had sufficient regard to regulation 4(2A) of the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013, when assessing if the claimant could undertake activities of PIP “repeatedly” in light of his difficulties and the need to rest afterwards as noted.

17.

There also appears to be insufficient findings to determine if due to the chronic fatigue the claimant can undertake activities of PIP on over 50% of the days in the required period in accordance with regulation 7.

18.

As such, I submit that the Tribunal have not sufficiently determined that the claimant can undertake activities of PIP in accordance with regulation 4(2A) to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and have therefore erred in law.”