British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
UK Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> UK Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions >> [2008] UKSSCSC CAF_2026_2007 (23 January 2008)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSSCSC/2008/CAF_2026_2007.html
Cite as: [2008] UKSSCSC CAF_2026_2007
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
[2008] UKSSCSC CAF_2026_2007 (23 January 2008)
CAF/2026/2007
DECISION OF THE PENSIONS APPEAL COMMISSIONER
1. This appeal by the claimant succeeds. In accordance with the provisions of section 6(A)(4) of the Pensions Appeal Tribunals Act 1943 (as amended), I set aside the decision of the London tribunal made on 13th March 2007 under reference ENT/00926/2006. I refer the matter to a completely differently constituted tribunal for a fresh hearing and decision in accordance with the directions given below.
2. The claimant should consider requesting the tribunal to hold an oral hearing and in default of such request consideration should in any event be given as to whether an oral hearing should be held. The parties should regard themselves as being on notice to send to the clerk to the tribunal as soon as is practicable any further relevant written medical or other evidence. The fact that the appeal has succeeded at this stage is not to be taken as any indication as to what the tribunal might decide in due course.
3. The parties are agreed that the decision of the tribunal was made in error of law. It is not necessary to go into any great detail. As I said when granting leave to appeal:
"On 17th August 2006 (in CAF/1607/2006) I set aside the decision of the previous tribunal and referred this appeal to a new tribunal for a fresh hearing. On referral by a Commissioner in such circumstances the new tribunal has a duty to consider the whole matter afresh, since the decision of the previous tribunal has been set aside. In this case the new tribunal considered only the grounds relating to pes planus, which formed the basis for my decision. However, it did not consider, as it should have done, the other matters that were before the original tribunal."
4. The Secretary of State has now accepted that the above is a correct statement of the position.
H. Levenson
Commissioner
23rd January 2008