Previous case law
Previous case law
We begin with the decision of the Court of Appeal in Wood v SSWP [2003] EWCA Civ 53 and two decisions of the same Tribunal of Commissioners (Commissioners Hickinbottom, Mesher and Turnbull) decided two months apart in, respectively, January and March 2004: R (IB) 2/04 and R (IS) 15/04. Both Tribunal of Commissioners decisions referred to and relied on Wood. All three cases were decided by reference to the provisions of the SSA 1998 as they stood before the amendments made by the Welfare Reform Act 2012 (“the WRA 2012”) and by reference to the previous version of the D&A Regulations, the Social Security and Child Support (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 1999(SI 1999/991) (“the 1999 D&A Regulations”).
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeals. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal in both appeals involved an error of law. Under section 12(2) (a), (b)(i) and (3) of the Tribunals
- These Directions may be supplemented by later directions by a Tribunal Caseworker, Tribunal Registrar or Judge in the Social Entitlement Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal
- The structure of our decision is as follows
- The facts of TR’s case and the First-tier Tribunal’s decision
- The facts of GD’s case and the First-tier Tribunal’s decision
- The grounds of appeal in both cases and the parties’ positions
- Relevant legislative provisions
- The legal framework
- “Any grounds” revision requests and appeals
- “Any time” revision requests and appeals
- The consequences of our interpretation
- Previous case law
- The earlier legislation
- Wood v SSWP
- R (IS) 15/04
- R (IB) 2/04
- CJ and SG v SSWP
- PH and SM v SSWP
- The post PH and SM v SSWP decisions
- What is required in order to trigger the right of appeal to the Tribunal in cases to which mandatory reconsideration applies
- Conclusion on the issues of principle
- Disposal in TR’s case
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 332 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)