CM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP): [2020] UKUT 259 (AAC)

Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision of Judge Perez on 28 February 2020.

• From: HM Courts & Tribunals Service and Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)
• Published: 28 October 2020

• Categories: Personal independence payment – daily living activities and Tribunal procedure and practice
• Sub-categories: Personal independence payment – daily living activities - Activity 3: managing therapy or monitoring a health condition, Tribunal procedure and practice - evidence and Tribunal procedure and practice - tribunal practice
• Judges: Perez, R
• Decision date: 28 February 2020

Read the full decision in CPIP/400/2017.

Judicial Summary

(1) Points arising from public discrediting of Secretary of State’s appointed assessor. (2) Whether Flexitol Heel Balm (25% urea) is medication: This was an issue but ended up not being decided. If it were medication, then help with it or with its application would attract fewer points than if (i) it were therapy, (ii) its application were therapy, or (iii) its application were managing therapy. Deciding the point in the claimant’s favour would have elevated the daily living award to the enhanced rate. There is no criticism of the claimant or his very able adviser for eventually conceding the point, faced with 199 pages of evidence on the point from the Secretary of State. Whether Flexitol Heel Balm (25% urea) is medication remains open for a first-time decision if that question arises in another case.

Published 28 October 2020