[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Blackburn v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2005] EWCA Civ 1767 (21 December 2005) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/1767.html Cite as: [2005] EWCA Civ 1767

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONERS

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2
		21st December 2005

1. LORD JUSTICE CARNWATH: This is a case which came before me in July. Mr Blackburn was seeking permission to appeal against the decision of Social Security Commissioner Jacobs, and I gave a short judgment then setting out the background. The main point was that it had been found that he had received benefit in periods where he had been working. Mr Blackburn challenged that. He produced to me two letters, one from Mrs Hearn relating to a period in 1999, and the other from Miss McKenna relating to a period in March 2002. He said that, contrary to what the Commissioner found, they showed that he had not been working in those periods. I made clear that I did not see any apparent issue of law. On the other hand, it seemed appropriate that he should be given a chance to put his new material before the relevant authorities. I suggested that he went to see the CAB to get help in doing that. I understand that he did that. The result has been that in the course of two decisions the Secretary of State has reconsidered his case and, under a procedure known as supersession, they have accepted for the first period that there is credible evidence in the form of Mrs Hearn's letter that he was not working. That part of the charge has been remitted. But they have not accepted Mrs McKenna's statement as anything of significance in relation to the second period. It is fair to say that one needs to read between the lines of her statement to find a clear indication that he was not working in that relevant period. However that may be, Miss Patry, who has appeared for the Secretary of State, has confirmed that he has a right of appeal against the recent decisions to the relevant tribunal, where he can advance his case on the facts.
2. In those circumstances I am quite clear that there is no outstanding issue which this court can usefully deal with. In those circumstances it seems to me that the only thing to do is to dismiss the application.

ORDER: Application refused.