Decision Summary Information

Back to Results | Search Again | Most Recent Decisions

Neutral Citation Number: 2015 UKUT 357 AAC
Reported Number:
File Number: CF 1192 2015
Appellant: RK
Respondent: Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (CHB)
Judge/Commissioner: Judge G. Knowles QC
Date Of Decision: 24/06/2015
Date Added: 07/07/2015
Main Category: Benefits for children
Main Subcategory: child benefit
Secondary Category:
Secondary Subcategory:
Notes: Reported as [2016] AACR 4. Child benefit – section 143(1)(b) Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 – whether claimant whose children not living with him required to make payments each week The claimant, a Polish national working in the United Kingdom (UK), claimed child benefit (CHB) for his children who lived with their mother in Poland. Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) refused his claim on the ground that he was not contributing to the cost of providing for the children at a weekly rate which was not less than the rate of child benefit payable for them. In his appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (F-tT) the claimant confirmed that he now used an online payments system and provided documentary evidence including receipts and bank statements. The F-tT refused his appeal, having assessed that his expenditure on himself was such that he would have insufficient income left for making payments to his family either for the amount stated or at CHB rates. However, the tribunal erred in law by overlooking evidence that the appellant’s expenditure was joint expenditure for himself and his family. The claimant appealed to the Upper Tribunal (UT). In its submission HMRC accepted that the F-tT had erred but argued that the tribunal’s decision should not be set aside as the claimant’s evidence of his expenditure post-dated HMRC’s decision and his contributions were not being made weekly at the relevant rate for the purposes of section 143(1)(b) of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992. Among the issues before the UT was the proper interpretation of section 143(1)(b) of the 1992 Act and whether a claimant whose children were not living with him was required to make weekly payments or payments at a weekly rate. Held, allowing the appeal, that: 1. the F-tT erred in law by overlooking relevant evidence, underestimating the financial resources available to the claimant to provide for his children and providing inadequate reasons for its decision (paragraphs 21 and 28); 2. section 12(8)(b) of the Social Security Act 1998 did not prevent a tribunal having regard either to evidence which was not before HMRC, and came into existence after the decision was made, or to evidence of events after the decision under appeal was made, for the purpose of drawing inferences as to the circumstances obtaining when or before the decision was made (paragraph 22); 3. section 143(1)(b) required contributions to be made at a weekly rate (not the making of weekly payments). It was not that the contribution needed to be made weekly but rather that the contribution needed to be made at a weekly rate not less than the applicable rate of child benefit. As long as there was evidence of contributions at the relevant child benefit rate towards the upkeep/cost of a child or children during the period under scrutiny, the statutory test was satisfied (paragraphs 29 to 34). The judge set aside the decision of the F-tT and re-made the decision to the effect that the claimant was entitled to child benefit.
Decision(s) to Download: [2016] AACR 4ws.doc [2016] AACR 4ws.doc