Decision Summary Information

Back to Results | Search Again | Most Recent Decisions

Neutral Citation Number:	2015 UKUT 626 AAC
Reported Number:
File Number:	CPIP 2054 2015
Appellant:	TR
Respondent:	Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Judge/Commissioner:	Judge M. R. Hemingway
Date Of Decision:	13/11/2015
Date Added:	26/11/2015
Main Category:	Personal independence payment
Main Subcategory:	General
Secondary Category:
Secondary Subcategory:
Notes:	Reported as [2016] AACR 23. Personal independence payment – assessment of activity – whether descriptor satisfied where claimant unable to perform relevant activity for part of day The claimant claimed personal independence payment (PIP) because, amongst other things, she suffered from severe optic atrophy which caused her difficulties when cooking, reading, writing and travelling. Following an examination by a healthcare professional the Department for Work and Pensions refused her claim, awarding no points for either the daily living component or the mobility component. The claimant appealed against that decision, emphasising that she had to be accompanied when visiting unfamiliar places, that her vision was extremely poor when it was dark and that she required assistance when going out in the dark. The First-tier Tribunal (F tT) awarded her two points for the daily living component but no more, on the grounds that the claimant only had difficulties for part of each day. The claimant appealed to the Upper Tribunal (UT) and the principal issue raised before it was the proper approach to a case where a claimant was unable to perform a task specified in a descriptor contained within Part 2 or Part 3 of Schedule 1 to the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013 for part of each day but not the whole of each day. Held, allowing the appeal, that: 1. for a descriptor to apply on a given day, the inability to perform the task or function must be more than trifling and had to have some tangible impact upon a claimant’s daily activity and functioning, but not more than that (paragraphs 32); 2. a person’s lifestyle was restricted by more than a trivial extent if they could show that their particular disability was sufficient effectively to debar them from following the route of a journey without assistance during the hours of dusk or darkness (paragraphs 33); 3. the F-tT’s decision that the descriptors were not met simply because there was only a difficulty for part of the day was flawed. It was sufficient that the claimant was unable to perform the relevant task at some point in a day, for a period which was more than trifling and which had some degree of impact upon her (paragraphs 34).
Decision(s) to Download:	[2016] AACR 23ws.doc