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.
The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal .� The decision of the First-tier Tribunal made on 17 February 2015 under number SC147/14/01379 was made in error of law.� Under section 12(2)(a) and (b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 I set that decision aside and remit the case to be reconsidered by a fresh tribunal in accordance with the following directions.
These Directions may be supplemented by later directions by a Tribunal Judge in the Social Entitlement Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal.
No party has requested an oral hearing of the appeal and I have decided that an oral hearing is not necessary.� This is an appeal on a point of law.� Oral evidence is irrelevant.
On 5 September 2013 the Appellant�s wife wrote to the Council saying that the Appellant had left the family home on 12 January. She said that she would have put a claim in earlier but that the Appellant had told her to keep the existing claim because they might get back together.� On 18 September the Council decided that there had been an overpayment of housing benefit between 14 January and 17 June 2013.
An oral hearing took place before the First-tier Tribunal on 17 February 2015.� The Appellant was present and a presenting officer attended on behalf of the Council.� The Appellant explained the matters set out in his written submissions.� Otherwise he did not dispute the facts.
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.