slotted spoon
CDLA/1714/2005 says that tribunals should take into account those aids that might be reasonably used such as, for example, a slotted spoon but must consider the claimant's ability to use them in the light of his or her disability.
Also
Below is the summary of RDLA3/06. Reading this, and noting your client's disability, it seems that regardless of the fact that your client could or could not use a slotted spoon, the tribunal should have actually gone on to establish within the dfinition of disability by the World Health Organisation, whether there was a need for frequent attention. So if the tribunal did not get in to ask appropriate question to establish attention requirment then surely that is also an error of law?
CDLA/1721/2004 — R(DLA) 3/06 Need for a medical diagnosis to determine severe disability
The case related to the need for a medical diagnosis to determine severe disability for the purposes of Sections 72 and 73(1)(d) of the Social Security and Contributions and Benefits Act 1992, and to issues that should be considered when deciding whether to call a child to give evidence
In their decision, the Tribunal of Commissioners reject the previously held view, taken for example in R(A)2/92, that a definite diagnosis or recognised medical condition is necessary to 'count' as disabled. Instead, they adapt the World Health Organisation definition of 'disability' to mean 'any restriction or lack of ability to perform an activity in the manner or within the range considered normal for a human being'. Accordingly, they conclude that the tests in Sections 72 and 73(1)(d) of a person being 'so severely disabled that' they require attention or supervision, or have mobility difficulties, cannot be equated with 'has such a serious medical condition that'.
|