Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
LEAP query re tribunal decision
Hi there,
I was hoping someone might be able to help with a client query we’ve had. I’ve read some of the threads on here but I’m still not clear on the answer.
Client’s PIP claim refused on 8th Feb 2017, upheld by tribunal on 10th July 2017 (we didn’t assist with the claim or tribunal).
Client received letter from DWP in Sep 2021 re changes in law to say we don’t think your claim is affected.
Client wrote to DWP in Oct 2021 to ask for case to be reviewed.
Dec 2021, DWP replied to say that they cannot overturn a tribunal decision, correct route is to seek leave to appeal for tribunal decision.
Jan 2022, client contacted HMCTS to seek leave to appeal but client says the DWP replied rather than HMCTS (I haven’t seen any papers yet so cannot confirm)
So my question is, is there actually a route of appeal here that is worth pursuing? Surely the request for leave should have been treated as a request for a statement of reasons, but even then it’s majorly out of time.
Many thanks!
Is your complaint about compliance with the MH decision or the RJ decision?
Is your complaint about compliance with the MH decision or the RJ decision?
Sorry forgot to include that! MH
The DWP do not have the power to revise the FtT’s decision or to supersede it for error of law - so there is nothing they would be able to do in this case.
Whilst in principle, the FtT could entertain a late application for permission to appeal*, the timings work against you. The MH decision was made on 28/11/16 and the, now quashed, 2017 regulations which sought to reverse the decision did not come into force until 16/03/17. Therefore in the course of things, you would have expected that the FtT which heard the appeal would have made a decision which complied with MH as that was, and would have appeared to be, the law at the time the decision was made.
I wouldn’t think that you have much chance at all of persuading a judge to accept, without the SOR, that the FtT in 2017 must have made its decision in a manner which was non-compliant with the law at the time and, also, that its appropriate to re-open a case decided nearly five years ago.
*As you note, strictly the application should be for an SOR in the first instance, however the prospects of an SOR being produced at this point are nil. The Tribunal would need to deal with the request in accordance with rule 38(7), so that it could refuse permission for a late SOR but then waive the requirement for one to be produced and proceed to deal with the PTA application.
The DWP do not have the power to revise the FtT’s decision or to supersede it for error of law - so there is nothing they would be able to do in this case.
Whilst in principle, the FtT could entertain a late application for permission to appeal*, the timings work against you. The MH decision was made on 28/11/16 and the, now quashed, 2017 regulations which sought to reverse the decision did not come into force until 16/03/17. Therefore in the course of things, you would have expected that the FtT which heard the appeal would have made a decision which complied with MH as that was, and would have appeared to be, the law at the time the decision was made.
I wouldn’t think that you have much chance at all of persuading a judge to accept, without the SOR, that the FtT in 2017 must have made its decision in a manner which was non-compliant with the law at the time and, also, that its appropriate to re-open a case decided nearly five years ago.
*As you note, strictly the application should be for an SOR in the first instance, however the prospects of an SOR being produced at this point are nil. The Tribunal would need to deal with the request in accordance with rule 38(7), so that it could refuse permission for a late SOR but then waive the requirement for one to be produced and proceed to deal with the PTA application.
Yes that is the answer I suspected, thankyou very much for your help Elliot!