Hi,
A colleague of mine attended a hearing on Tuesday to represent a Pension Credit client in a complex issue over whether land should be treated as business capital and social services establishing material factes regarding client's use of resources.

The Chair said he was there to decide whether the decision was 'practical and reasonable' within the framework of the legislation.
No decision was given and nor was the hearing adjourned. The Chair said he wished to 'think about it' and that was it.
No paperwork given to rep or Client and none the wiser as to what is going on.

Any thoughts on Chair's actions would be appreciated.

Thanks.

"The Chair said he was there to decide whether the decision was 'practical and reasonable'"

Um, if this is in context, the Judge (as they now are) is wrong. Judges are not there to "rubber stamp" DWP/LA decisions, nor to simply review such decision. Judges replace the original decision maker and must arrive at their own decision(s), which may or may not be the same as the original decision. There is authority on this aspect, but I don't have time to drill at the moment....

Was there an actual hearing of the issues? If so, then what has happened is a deferred decision to be posted out as soon as possible. No paperwork is, as a matter of law, required at this stage as long as the tribunal has made it clear to the appellant, either directly or through his representative, what is happening. This is quite common.

There are several reasons for doing this. For instance, the hearings are overrunning or the issues are complex and will take time to consider and the tribunal wishes to hear the next case and then consider your client's case at the end of the session.

If there has not been a full hearing of the issues then I'm at a loss to understand what is going on.

Like Kevin I also am puzzled by the tribunal’s statement, particularly the use of the word “practical”. The tribunal’s role is to establish, on the balance of probabilities, what the facts are and then to apply the law to those facts. Practicality doesn’t really come into it and reasonableness only does insofar as establishing whether such things as views held by claimants are “reasonably held” or certain actions taken by any of the parties were reasonable or not.

Thanks guys,

I too am bemused by the judge's initial comments.
I was quite sure the decision had just been deferred, but for the client and rep not to understand what was happening, I felt was a poor show.

As it turns out.... I have just been informed that a decision has been made, in the client's favour, although not in connection to anything appealed, nor any issue the DWP had considered. My colleague is now keeping his fingers crossed that the DWP don't find an error in law to appeal.

Thank Goodness it's friday