[2025] UKUT 306 (AAC)

The FTT made an error of law (which means, a legal mistake) by failing to explore, and evaluate, the reasons TB did not know about the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012, including as part of the circumstances preventing her applying for compensation before October 2021.

The decision in R(JA) indicates an FTT needs to explore a person’s wider circumstances, including why the person did not know the Scheme existed. Upper Tribunal Judge Wright explained at paragraph 31 of R(JA) that this frames the reasonableness of what the person did, or did not do, to find out about the Scheme. It is also part and parcel of the package of circumstances resulting in the person not applying for compensation sooner (paragraph of R(JA), which cites, with approval, paragraph 45 of MM).

Although R(JA) had been decided and published before the FTT made its decision, the FTT’s written reasons do not reflect the legal principles set out by Upper Tribunal Judge Wright. Instead of treating ignorance of the 2012 Scheme as a relevant factor in considering exceptional circumstances and evaluating it as part of TB’s wider circumstances, the FTT decided it was “no defence” to the fact TB’s application had been made late, and disregarded it from its assessment of whether exceptional circumstances applied to TB.

Linked to its failure to consider and apply the principles set out in R(JA), the FTT failed to provide adequate findings of fact and / or reasons for its decision. This is because it rejected as not relevant, the fact TB did not know about the 2012 Scheme. Having done so, the FTT therefore did not explore why she did not know about it, and what she reasonably could have done to make herself aware of it.

The FTT therefore made material errors of law in reaching its decision dated 31 May 2024.