Decision Summary Information

Back to Results | Search Again | Most Recent Decisions

Neutral Citation Number:	2016 UKUT 190 AAC
Reported Number:
File Number:	CPIP 2094 2015
Appellant:	SP
Respondent:	Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
Judge/Commissioner:	Judge A. Rowley
Date Of Decision:	13/04/2016
Date Added:	27/04/2016
Main Category:	Personal independence payment – daily living activities
Main Subcategory:	Activity 4: washing and bathing
Secondary Category:
Secondary Subcategory:
Notes:	Reported as [2016] AACR 43. Personal independence payment – daily living activity 4: washing and bathing – “or” in descriptor 4e is disjunctive – reference is to an unadapted bath or shower The claimant claimed personal independence payment (PIP) because he suffered from degenerative disc disease, chronic fatigue syndrome and depression and anxiety. Following an examination by a healthcare professional the Secretary of State rejected his claim. The claimant was awarded a total of six points for descriptor 1b (needs to use an aid or appliance to be able to either prepare or cook a simple meal), 4b (needs to use an aid or appliance to be able to wash or bathe), and 6b (needs to use an aid or appliance to be able to dress or undress). The First-tier Tribunal (F-tT) awarded him another point under descriptor 3b (needs to use an aid to be able to manage his medication) and a further four points under mobility descriptor 2b but these were insufficient to meet the statutory threshold for either the daily living or mobility components. On appeal to the Upper Tribunal (UT) the main issues were whether the word “or” in the phrase “bath or shower” was used in the disjunctive sense in descriptor 4e and whether the assessment should be for an unadapted bath or shower. Held, allowing the appeal, that: 1. the word “or” is used in descriptor 4e in the disjunctive sense. Accordingly, if a claimant cannot do one of the activities of (i) getting in or out of a bath or (ii) getting in or out of a shower, they will satisfy descriptor 4e. The questions must be asked through the prism of regulation 4(2A). The issue of safety (regulation 4(2A)(a) and 4(4)(a)), in particular, may be relevant (paragraphs 15 and 29); 2. whether or not the claimant satisfies descriptor 4e must be determined by reference to an unadapted bath or shower (paragraphs 20 to 21 and 30); 3. if a claimant in fact has and uses an adapted bath or shower, questions should be asked as to the reasons why he or she does so and what links it had to their lack of functional ability. Installation following an occupational therapy assessment may, self-evidently, be a powerful indicator (paragraphs 23 to 24 and 31); 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 her directions.
Decision(s) to Download:	[2016] AACR 43ws.doc