There was a discussion on here a while ago where I suggested that a decision could only be superseded where an award was in place. Someone (Tony Bowman, I think) proffered a CD where in some cirrcumstances a nil entitlement decision could be superseded where that nil entitlement decision was itself a superseding decision of a previous award and was one in a chain of decisions.

This would allow a tribunal to make an award (of JSA in this case) for a fixed period, supersede that decision as the claimant had gone back to work for several weeks and then to supersede that second decision to restore JSA where a second claim had not been made. Does anyone know it?

The CDs covering the scenarios are CIS/2595/2003 & CH/0269/2006.

At face value, the argument is that if there is a retrospective period of "nil entitlement" that is the subject of an all-in-one decision at a later date, CIS/2595/2003 is authority for enabling such a decision to be lawful and for any continuing "benefit" to lawfully constitute benefit. For completeness, there are some (myself included) who believe CIS/2595/2003 may well NOT apply to HB/CTB as the legislative basis of HB/CTB is not the same as for other DWP benefits. This has yet to be tested (at least to my knowledge).

CH/0269/2006 would be applicable where a decision was made resulting in the end of benefit entitlement (whether by supersession or revision), then there is a gap, then an entirely separate decision is made starting benefit from a date that leaves a gap. In these circumstances, a "nil award" decision cannot be superseded - a new claim is needed to restart benefit.

Hope this is clearer to you than it immediately seems to me....

Thanks Kevin

I've now got the IS decision and although distinguished I can get some mileage from it. Have you got the HB decision for comparison ? Its not on here nor on the The tribunals Service site.

Paul

This one?

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/pdfs/CH_269_2006.doc

Thanks for that. I'm off now for an eye check up!