Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
"an assessment of the extent to which a person who has some specific disease or bodily or mental disablement is capable of performing the activities prescribed in the Schedule [to the Regulations], or is incapable by reason of such disease or bodily or mental disablement of performing those activities".
[4] The respondent re-assessed the applicant's qualification in light of the medical opinion. The applicant scored only 9 points on Part I (descriptor 13(e), continence) and none under Part II. Accordingly, on 9 January 2007 , the respondent determined that, as a result of a change of circumstances (Social Security Act 1998 (c 14) section 10; Social Security and Child Support (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 1999 (SI 1999 No 991), the applicant no longer qualified for NICs.
"All the appellant's problems are related to her problems of continence and although the appellant's representative asked the tribunal to consider all the mental descriptors in relation to coping with pressure, the appellant's pressure is all as a result of her physical problem and not her mental problem and so no points were awarded in respect of any descriptors...".
The Tribunal refused the appeal and confirmed the decision of the respondent on 25 July 2007 .
[9] In relation to mental health, the Commissioner noted a decision from the Chief Commissioner (CIB/4053/2003) that:
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.