Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
Convention Rights and the Work Capability Assessment
Well well…
A Tribunal has just accepted that; analogous to MM & DM, convention rights are in play when making a WCA decision. Where there is a failure to obtain medical evidence when they are already mandated to do -in this case there was an expression of a history of suicide attempts, but discussion of self harm or people under appointeeship should also trigger an ESA113 being issued- then that consitutes a breach of the Sec State’s duties to act in a manner consistent with the ECHR as laid down at S6(1) HRA.
Could be a handy wee argument so beyond waving my arms around a bit I thought I’d share.
this finding is pretty consistent with the court of appeal finding on the wca and mental health/learning disability then?
what was the actual outcome decision in this case, if the medical or process is invalid does the person need to have another assessment?
Yes it’s consistent; I argued that MM & DM were analogous to the decision in Thlimennos and the Tribunal accepted it.
It was a conversion decision so with the supersession invalid it should be back to IB.
In practice I suspect (hope) they’ll appeal it and suspend the effect until the UT has had it’s say.
What’s MM & DM mean?
I almost hope it does go to UT. It’s handy having some precedent to pull out of the proverbial hat.
What’s MM & DM mean?
see rightsnet news story… http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/news/story/court-of-appeal-rejects-dwp-against-decision-that-claimants-with-mental-hea
I almost hope it does go to UT. It’s handy having some precedent to pull out of the proverbial hat.
Indeed…
this finding is pretty consistent with the court of appeal finding on the wca and mental health/learning disability then?
what was the actual outcome decision in this case, if the medical or process is invalid does the person need to have another assessment?
Sorry I missed this.
Supersession invalid so still entitled to IB. They might need ot have another assessment or they might appeal the decision and suspend the effect thus leaving the appellant in the WRAG until it’s sorted out.
I’d post the decision notice but I’ve not got a thick enough black pen to obscure the details of the appellant against the might of our scanner.