Decision Summary Information

Back to Results | Search Again | Most Recent Decisions

Neutral Citation Number:	2015 UKUT 309 AAC
Reported Number:
File Number:	UK 5338 2014
Appellant:	PE
Respondent:	Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Judge/Commissioner:	Judge E. Jacobs
Date Of Decision:	03/06/2015
Date Added:	19/06/2015
Main Category:	Personal independence payment
Main Subcategory:	General
Secondary Category:	Personal independence payment – daily living activities
Secondary Subcategory:	Activity 6: dressing and undressing
Notes:	Reported as [2016] AACR 10 Personal independence payment – assessment of activity – proper interpretation of regulation 4(2A) Daily living activity 6: dressing and undressing – danger of defining out of consideration the effects of the claimant’s disabilities The claimant made a claim for a personal independence payment (PIP), as part of the transition from disability living allowance to PIP. The Department for Work and Pensions refused the claim, awarding no points for either the daily living component or the mobility component. The claimant appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (F-tT) and, among other things, it decided that she did not satisfy any of the descriptors in activity 6 in Schedule 1 to the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013 because she wore easy to wear clothes. The issue before the Upper Tribunal was whether activity 6 was to be tested by reference to the clothes which a claimant actually wore or to a more abstract test. Held, allowing the appeal, that: 1. PIP was based on a functional assessment of the claimant’s ability to carry out daily living activities. The extent to which that ability was limited determined both entitlement and the rate of entitlement. The only limitations on the claimant’s ability that were relevant were those that arose from a physical or mental condition. It followed that a claimant’s choice of clothing was irrelevant, unless it was dictated by their physical or mental condition (paragraphs 12 to 13); 2. the proper application of activity 6 required a tribunal to concentrate on the functions involved in dressing and undressing and on the claimant’s condition which limited the ability to perform those functions. That approach would prevent claimants from generating their own entitlement while not allowing their own disability to be used against them. Detailed guidance was provided on how a tribunal should make its assessment (paragraphs 12 to 20); 3. the ambiguity within regulation 4(2A) of the 2013 Regulations disappeared if the words “do so” were read as referring to “carry out an activity”. Read in this way the issue was simply whether, for each descriptor, the activity involved could be performed safely (paragraphs 22 to 24). The judge set aside the decision of the F-tT and remitted the appeal to a differently constituted tribunal to be re-decided in accordance with his directions.
Decision(s) to Download:	[2016] AACR 10ws.doc