Right, with those clues a search of our CD-Rom reveals a few possibilities of juggling numbers and dates.:
CDLA/4329/2001
"6. I have, nevertheless, come to the conclusion that the decision of the tribunal was erroneous in point of law. Although the tribunal clearly regarded the claimant’s evidence as exaggerated, they did not make any explicit finding with regard to her actual walking ability. The tribunal also dealt with the need for the claimant to show that she was physically disabled in order to establish entitlement to higher rate mobility component, but I do not agree that it was necessary for her to show that chronic fatigue syndrome was either caused by or resulted in some other physical disablement. A diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome is made on the basis of the existence of symptoms which cannot be explained by other causes, and it is for that reason that a physical explanation for inability to walk is actually inconsistent with the existence of the condition."
CSDLA/849/2001
"43. Moreover, provided a physical disablement is a material cause of the claimant’s difficulty in walking, whether alone or in combination with other factors, it is irrelevant if the ultimate cause is mental disablement. In CDLA/16484/1986, the Commissioner was considering chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). There is considerable medical controversy about the aetiology and progress of CFS. It is usually considered to commence with a viral infection but there is dispute about any objectively verifiable clinical abnormalities after recovery from such infection. The Commissioner held that what matters is the nature of the disablement which results from a particular claimant’s CFS at the relevant time. Even if the ultimate origin of the CFS was physical, but during the period in issue when the viral infection has cleared it is low mood rather than any current physical disablement which causes reduced walking, then a claimant does not qualify for higher mobility. Conversely, if depression means that a claimant takes no exercise, as a consequence of which there is muscle wasting and loss of muscle power which now restrict ability to walk, then the walking may be classified as limited by physical disablement. If the claimant’s walking restrictions arise from a mixture of mental and physical factors, then the tribunal will have to determine whether a current operative material cause of those restrictions is a physical disablement such that the statutory tests are satisfied."
more probably
CDLA/948/2000 "9. The claimant has been found to suffer physical pain not because of any apparent physical problem but because of some unspecified psychological cause. This gives rise to two issues -whether the pain itself is physical disablement and whether the psychological cause is mental disablement. If either question is answered in the affirmative then the tribunal should have gone on to consider whether the pain or the psychological cause was so severe that the care component or lower rate mobility conditions were satisfied. If the pain was held to be physical disablement, but not otherwise, then (subject to a point to which I shall return as to the effect of the wording of regulation 12 of the Social Security (Disability Living Allowance) Regulations 1991 as amended) the tribunal should have gone on to consider whether the higher rate mobility conditions were satisfied."
|