Decision Summary Information

Back to Results | Search Again | Most Recent Decisions

Neutral Citation Number:	2011 UKUT 102 AAC
Reported Number:
File Number:	CIS 1269 2010
Appellant:	KQ
Respondent:	Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Judge/Commissioner:	Judge H. Levenson
Date Of Decision:	10/03/2011
Date Added:	19/04/2011
Main Category:	Capital
Main Subcategory:	Disregards: personal injury/other compensation
Secondary Category:
Secondary Subcategory:
Notes:	Reported as [2011] AACR 43 Capital – disregard of trust fund derived from compensation for personal injury – meaning of “in consequence of any personal injury” – compensation for negligence of solicitors in pursuing personal injury scheme The claimant was in receipt of income support. She received £170,000 compensation from solicitors for their negligence in dealing with her claim for compensation against a surgeon in respect of medical negligence and the money was paid into a trust fund. The Secretary of State decided that she was no longer entitled to income support because she had capital in excess of the statutory limit of £16,000. She appealed to the First-tier Tribunal, which upheld the Secretary of State’s decision, concluding that the disregards in paragraphs 12 and 12A of Schedule 10 to the Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 for certain payments made in consequence of any personal injury to the claimant did not apply. The disregard in paragraph 12 applies to the funds of a trust derived from a payment made in consequence of any personal injury to the claimant, but the tribunal considered the chain of causation in the claimant’s case between the payment and the personal injuries sustained too remote. The claimant appealed to the Upper Tribunal. It was agreed that the claim against the solicitors was only for the damages that would have been awarded against or received from the surgeon if the solicitors had not been negligent. Held, allowing the appeal, that: The First-tier Tribunal had failed to give due weight to the meaning of the words “in consequence of”. While there might be cases where elements in damages were excluded from the disregards in paragraphs 12 and 12A, in the present case, where the whole of the £170,000 amounted to damages in respect of what would have been claimed from the negligent surgeon, the actual wording of the disregards clearly applied (paragraph 13).
Decision(s) to Download:	[2011] AACR 43.doc