Decision Summary Information

Back to Results | Search Again | Most Recent Decisions

Neutral Citation Number:
Reported Number:	R(DLA)2/05
File Number:	CDLA 1670 2004
Appellant:
Respondent:
Judge/Commissioner:	Judge D. Williams
Date Of Decision:	24/08/2004
Date Added:	23/09/2004
Main Category:	DLA, AA: personal care
Main Subcategory:	cooking test
Secondary Category:
Secondary Subcategory:
Notes:	Care component ability to prepare a cooked main meal correct approach to decision-making The tribunal refused disability living allowance (DLA) after an oral hearing at which both the claimant and the Department were represented, and which the claimant attended with her husband. The claimant was seeking only the lowest rate of the care component. In her grounds of appeal she criticised the decisions of the tribunal and Secretary of State, and challenged the wording of the questions asked in the DLA claim form DLA1A in relation to the test of inability to prepare a cooked main meal (the "cooking test"). Held, dismissing the appeal, that: 1. the definitive interpretation of the cooking test was now that of the House of Lords in Moyna v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2003] UKHL 44, [2003] 1 WLR 1929, R(DLA) 7/03, which could be taken as endorsing and to some extent replacing the interpretation in R(DLA) 2/95 in confirming that the test required taking a broad view of the facts and making a judgment; 2. in testing a claimant's abilities against the hypothetical test, a tribunal should look at all the evidence as to the claimant's ability to perform the activities involved in cooking, including direct evidence of actual difficulties with cooking and indirect evidence of other activities using the same bodily functions that are normally used in cooking; 3. there was no problem with the wording of the form DLA1A, as essentially it left it to the claimant to explain her or his own problems and for decision-makers to decide if the test is met; 4. the tribunal based its conclusion on an overall view of the evidence, including the information on the claim form and, judged as a whole, its decision was an extremely thorough one on the facts.
Decision(s) to Download:	R(DLA) 2 05 bv.doc