Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v IR

For a beneficial supersession based on a change of circumstances, the effective date is governed by the date of the relevant application and the timing rules in the Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker's Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013/381. A later review form may require a fresh determination of entitlement. It is not necessarily part of an unbroken review process begun by an earlier form.

Where the documents permit only one conclusion about the supersession date, the Upper Tribunal may set aside the First-tier Tribunal's decision and remake it rather than remit the matter.

The Secretary of State appealed against a First-tier Tribunal decision which had awarded IR the enhanced rate of the personal independence payment mobility component from 2 September 2019. The First-tier Tribunal treated a 2019 review form and subsequent decisions as one continuing review process.

The issue before the Upper Tribunal was the date from which the enhanced mobility award took effect. IR had identified as under appeal the mandatory reconsideration decision of 21 June 2022, which concerned a decision informed by a further review form completed in September 2021. The Secretary of State contended that the relevant application was made on 18 August 2021.

1. Appeal allowed. The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by treating the September 2019 form as commencing a single, unbroken review process that continued through the later decisions and the September 2021 form.

2. Under section 10(5) of the Social Security Act 1998, subject to the regulations, a superseding decision generally takes effect from the date on which the relevant application was made. For an advantageous change of circumstances, Schedule 1 paragraph 12 of the Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker's Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013/381 provides for effect from the change; paragraph 14 alters that position where notification is more than one month late.

3. On the available documents, the relevant application was made on 18 August 2021. There was no evidence that the one-month provision applied. The September 2021 form invited a determination of entitlement on the information then supplied. It was not a continuation of a process looking back to the 2019 form. IR's own notice of appeal also identified the later decision as the decision under challenge.

4. There was only one available conclusion on the supersession date. Exercising the power in section 12(2)(a) and (b)(ii) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, the Upper Tribunal set aside the First-tier Tribunal decision and remade it. IR was entitled to enhanced daily living and mobility components from 18 August 2021, rather than 2 September 2019. The practical effect was confined to the mobility component because the daily living component was already at the enhanced rate.

• Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber): allowed the Secretary of State's appeal, set aside the First-tier Tribunal decision for error of law, and remade the award with effect from 18 August 2021.
• First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber): on 12 May 2023, issued on 15 May 2023, awarded the enhanced daily living and mobility components from 2 September 2019 for an ongoing period.