Case No. UKUT-00655-(IAC)

2. Immediately following the hearing before the FtT, on the same day, the Appellant wrote to the Secretary of State’s presenting officer’s unit. His letter complained in general terms of “ ill mannered, rude, insulting, bias and prejudicial conduct ” on the part of the presenting officer concerned (the “ PO ”). He adverted to a letter from his wife’s General Practitioner containing the statement that “ …. She is on appropriate medication ”. Having done so, he attributed to the PO the comment , when questioning his wife at the hearing : [a] “ …. It is strange that you do not know the name of the antidepressant even though you take it every day ”. The letter continues: [b] “ The Honourable Judge intervened and mentioned that the doctor stated she is on ‘appropriate’ medication. ” This, per the Appellant’s letter, was followed by a question from the PO : [c] “ Why are the names of any medication not mentioned? ” Next, the letter complains that, with reference to the Appellant’s condition of DVT, the PO stated: [d] “ That’s not a problem. ” 3. The decision of the FtT addresses medical issues in a number of places. First, the Judge summarises the Appellant’s evidence that his wife is suffering from osteoporosis and arthritis; her health had deteriorated since arriving in the United Kingdom and he was her carer in various respects, which he particularised. The Judge also summarises the evidence of the Appell ant’s spouse, in these terms: s he has been suffering from osteoporosis since the age of 40; her condition has deteriorated; she also suffers from osteoarthritis; she has been “ in and out of hospital ” on account of depression; she takes medication which does not help; the Appellant perfo rms the basic household tasks; and she was “ one step away ” from resorting to a wheelchair. 4. In later passages of its decision, the FtT makes certain comments and findings about the medical issues: “ I have before me a brief letter from her GP … who confirms that Mrs Wagner suffers from osteoporosis and osteoarthritis. This letter provides little information about the extent of her medical conditions and how they affect her. [The doctor] does not indicate that she will be confined to a wheelchair in the near future. The Appellant has suggested that she would be unable to live on her own. This suggests a significant level of disability but I had little medical evidence to support this claim …. I also find it significant that in spite of claiming to be severely disabled, Mrs Wagner has not made application for Disability benefits which would assist her. There was no medical evidence to suggest that Mrs Wagner would be unable to travel to South Africa with the Appellant. ” This latter statement is a reference to the scenario of the Appellant returning to South Africa for the purpose of making a settlement application, the evidence being that 96% of such applications are processed and determined within a period of 60 days.