supersession or submission for tribunal

Client has been awarded LCW but not LCWRA so appealed to go into Support Group. Although points were originally awarded for one of the ‘mobilising’ descriptors the Sec of States sub has invited the Tribunal to remove those points and with it the entitlement to any ESA. I don’t think that there is any doubt that the Tribunal will have to deal with it as it has clearly been put at issue and the client is clear that they want to go ahead with the appeal.

I can see why the Sec of State has not just superseded the LCW decsion at the MR stage, there is nothing now known or has subsequently changed since the original decision and this seems to rule out a supersession under Reg 6 of the SSCS(D&A) Regs but would this necessarily have a bearing on an appeal case? Any thoughts/case law gratefully recieved.

thanks

1. The points would have been at risk in any case.

2. The submission writer must have a different opinion to the decision maker and is expressing that thought.

3. A different opinion, at that stage, isn’t a change of circumstances to enable the decision to be changed.

Pete C - 07 August 2015 11:08 AM

Client has been awarded LCW but not LCWRA so appealed to go into Support Group. Although points were originally awarded for one of the ‘mobilising’ descriptors the Sec of States sub has invited the Tribunal to remove those points and with it the entitlement to any ESA. I don’t think that there is any doubt that the Tribunal will have to deal with it as it has clearly been put at issue and the client is clear that they want to go ahead with the appeal.

I can see why the Sec of State has not just superseded the LCW decsion at the MR stage, there is nothing now known or has subsequently changed since the original decision and this seems to rule out a supersession under Reg 6 of the SSCS(D&A) Regs but would this necessarily have a bearing on an appeal case? Any thoughts/case law gratefully recieved.

thanks

Not necessarily.  Presuming that there has been no change of circumstances, supersession would involve having to show that the original decision was flawed due to a mistake as to, or ignorance of a material fact.  The tribunal’s job is easier in that respect.  It can just interpret the evidence differently.