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 appeal is allowed.� The decision of the tribunal held at Belfast on 22 March 2011 is set aside.� The case is remitted to a freshly constituted tribunal for a rehearing.
1.��� The claimant has appealed against the decision of the tribunal held on 22 March 2011 at Belfast in relation to their decision in respect of their entitlement to incapacity benefit.� The Department of Social Development made a submission on the claimant�s application for leave to appeal.� In that submission the Department was not supportive of the claimant�s grounds of appeal but the Department did identify an error in law on the basis set out therein where it is said under reference to the principles laid down by the Commissioner in C12/08�09 (DLA)
�Therefore I would contend it is obvious the supersession issue was not addressed by the tribunal either in the decision notice or the statement of reasons. �Consequently the principles laid down in C12/08-09(DLA) have not been adhered to by the tribunal. �Therefore its failure to make explicit its determination, findings and conclusions on the supersession issue renders its decision erroneous in law.�
2.��� Having granted leave to appeal I directed the Department to make a further submission as to how it submits the appeal should be disposed of in light of its submission that the tribunal have erred in law.
4.��� The claimant was given the opportunity of responding to that submission and she said:
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.