Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
New three - judge panel decision looking at Reg 35 and evidence of WRA
Just picked up an appeal bundle for a case that includes reg 35 which includes notice to stay the appeal pending the outcome of the three judge panel. So does this mean that no reg 35 appeals will be heard until the final outcome of Dan’s appeal - the court of appeal is a long process and in this client’s case he is only entitled to contribution based and therefore it is important for him to have the appeal heard asap.
Cheers
UT hasn’t recevieved the application for permission to appeal yet but there’s a month left on the deadline.
I was advised by a DEA in January 2014 that ESA WRAG awards with a prognosis/reassessment date of 18 months or less would be automatically referred onto the Work Programme.
I am planning to use this information in a Reg 35 appeal in the future.
Where the DWP states “telephone wfi every 6 months can be arranged” I want to see this formalised in an agreement with the claimant. Otherwise, I believe the WRA to be Work Programme conditionality; CVs, regular f2f appointments, courses or group work.
It is important that Tribunals consider this when setting recommendations for reassessment <18 months in WRAG = work programme.
If you track back to Touchbase from November 13 I think you will find the announcement re mandatory referral to WP. I’ve got a copy somewhere but I’m flying out in 5 minutes so I’m stumped.
However taking IM into account; it is not the risk from the referral but the postulated risk from the activity that is under assessment. You can borrow the postulate from Judge Jacobs in NS.
The fact that a person would not be referred is not material. If you have a good hard stare at IM you will find commentary as IM certainly would not have been referred to WP when the Ft Tribunal heard the appeal.
Thanks Dan, that’s really helpful. I’ve sourced the relevant documents but I’m not too sure what ‘IM’ refers to. Please forgive me, I’ve only been doing this Welf thing for 18 months.
IM is the name of the appellant in Dan’s case - summary here -
too many letters gets very confusing I agree :)
“Just picked up an appeal bundle for a case that includes reg 35 which includes notice to stay the appeal pending the outcome of the three judge panel. So does this mean that no reg 35 appeals will be heard until the final outcome of Dan’s appeal - the court of appeal is a long process and in this client’s case he is only entitled to contribution based and therefore it is important for him to have the appeal heard asap.”
In my case, HMCTS have listed for a hearing in the near future anyway. When I find out if this is for a normal hearing, or to consider stay request, I’ll let you know.
A bundle for one of my appeals (straight WCA failure) has just turned up and contains what seems to now be a stock ‘cut & paste’ para to the effect that the appeal should be stayed pending the outcome of the three judge panel. The odd thing is that whilst we have argued client should be in the SG, its on the basis of the Schedule 3 activites (activity 1 to be precise) and it has never been suggested that Reg 35 applies to the client.
Don’t understand that at all. Can only think someone at the DWP end now believes ALL appeals where ‘SG’ has been mentioned should be stayed regardless of the circumstances. Or something.
Considering the principle in IM is that if there’s the slightest hint that there is a risk then put them in the SG I’m not surprised that DWP are casting the net widely.
Any chance you could scan the stock phrase to me? dan dot manville at wolverhampton dot gov dot uk
I can pass it on to the solicitor who’s waiting for some activity by DWP.
Cheers
I have just had what appears to be a stock reply regarding reg 35 and my case is for support group on schedule 3 as well, reg 35 is not the reason for requesting supersession!
Snap. Exactly the same as mine (see earlier post).
Dan, I’m not in the office currently but will scan & email you in the morning.
Cheers
We’ve just today seen an application to stay a reg 35 case at the UT pending consideration of whether to appeal. I suspect it will be Lynton Crosby’s call at the end of the day.
Have now emailed you Dan.
I tried saying Thanks earlier but it wouldn’t accept my submission (the number of Judges who’ve said that to me…)
Thank you; I have now passed it on to the solicitor dealing with the case.
Reading through the notice I have received; where people are making SG appeals and an application to stay has been made the FtT has discretion to hear the appeals as though our case lost. The anti test case rule applies!
Lots of people are saying that they’re pursuing sched 3 descriptors… if it’s a strong case you can petition the FtT to hear the case anyway. Indeed FtTs can even decide reg 35 but they might be reluctant to and they certainly can’t adopt the approach taken by the panel in IM.
Sorry if that’s a lesson in sucking eggs but I’ve never seen a notice under S26 SSA issued before.
I’ve just had one come back from the UT for re-listing before another FtT. The DWP have requested it be stayed also which is odd as I never argued reg 35 at the original hearing and don’t intend arguing it now. The request has been refused, even before I’ve had a chance to respond.
I’ve got an upcoming case re: Reg 35 that the DWP have requested be postponed pending whether the DWP appeal to the Court of Appeal.
However my client knew the sort of WRA she would be expected to undertake - she had been told to go to English classes despite having mental health & mobility issues - which was the focus of our argument
The District Judge gave the DWP short shrift and told them they had plenty of time before the hearing to address this point - whether or not there is an appeal against IM v SSWP [2014] UKUT412