|
The Court of Session in Scotland recently issued its judgement in a petition brought by a Mr.Mooney, who was seeking a judicial review of the refusal by a Social Security Commissioner to grant him leave to appeal on a question of law from a decision of a social security appeal tribunal.
Lord Brodie dismisses the petition as he reasons the Commissioner had not erred in law in refusing to grant leave.
Mr. Mooney was seeking to dispute an appeal tribunal's dismissal of his appeal against the decision that he was not entitled to DLA.
In his notice of application to the Commissioner for leave to appeal, he contrasted what appears in his supporting statement in his GP's report that he "Walks very slowly and can manage about 100 yards" with the finding in fact by the Appeal Tribunal that: "He is able to walk 100 metres at a slow pace." He contended that the Appeal Tribunal gave no reason for not adopting the GP's statement as to speed being "very slow".
The Commissioner had refused leave by holding that:
"The suggested ground for appeal not appear to me to raise any proper issue of law. It is not a true point of law to raise an argument on semantics as to whether a particular walking falls to be categorised as 'slow' or 'very slow'. That is especially so where, as here, the distance covered would itself be sufficient to negate any award"
Lord Brodie dismisses the application for judicial review as he agrees with the Commissioner's opinion that there is no material difference between the above two expressions, especially in the light of the distance covered.
Click here for a copy of the judgement
|
