Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
Continual/continuous supervision conundrum
Just been reading this new decision CPIP/3573/2015 [2016] UKUT 219 (AAC)
At paragraph 12, Judge Bano states that (my emphasis): ”Although there is of course no requirement in the 2013 PIP Regulations for supervision to be continual, in deciding whether a claimant needs supervision in order to carry out a task safely, I therefore see no reason to depart from the well-established approach taken in disability living allowance cases for deciding whether supervision is reasonably required, including the making of an assessment where necessary of the possible seriousness of the consequences if supervision is not provided-see R(A) 2/89.
Surely the definition in Schedule 1 for supervision does include something of that nature, and indeed, actually goes further in that it requires the supervision to be continuous rather than continual i.e. the supervision cannot have any breaks at all?
Sch.1 Part 1, sec.1 - supervision” means the continuous presence of another person for the purpose of ensuring C’s safety
Am I missing something in my reading of this decision? Any thought gratefully received. I don’t think it throws the whole decision as Judge Bano finds other errors of law, but it does have implications perhaps around needs and requires maybe?