[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Northern Ireland - Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Northern Ireland - Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions >> [1998] NISSCSC C11/98(IB) (7 December 1998) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NISSCSC/1998/C11_98(IB).html Cite as: [1998] NISSCSC C11/98(IB)

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

[1998] NISSCSC C11/98(IB) (7 December 1998)

 


Decision No: C11/98(IB)

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 SOCIAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTIONS AND BENEFITS (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 SOCIAL SECURITY (CONSEQUENTIAL PROVISIONS) (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 INCAPACITY BENEFIT Appeal to the Social Security Commissioner on a question of law from the decision of the Belfast Social Security Appeal Tribunal dated 21 August 1997 DECISION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER
1. This is an appeal, leave having been granted by the Tribunal Chairman, against a decision dated 21 August 1997 of a Social Security Appeal Tribunal (hereinafter called "the Tribunal") sitting at Belfast. An oral hearing of the appeal was not requested and I am satisfied that I can deal with the appeal without such a hearing.
2. The claimant's grounds for appeal were set out in the OSSC1 form received in the Commissioner's office on 6 February 1998 and further comments dated 14 August 1998 and 21 August 1998. Observations were received from Mr McAvoy of Central Adjudication Services dated 13 May 1998.
3. My decision is that the Tribunal was not in error of law and the appeal is therefore disallowed.
4. In the OSSC1 form Mr O'Rawe, who represented the claimant, indicated that the claimant, despite a request having been made had not received any copy of the reasons for the Tribunal's decision but instead had received a blank form signed by the Chairman. That is correct. It appears however that the Chairman had recorded reasons and that due to an administrative error these were not sent out. I had further enquiries made into this matter and it was ascertained that the reasons were sent out to the claimant on 13 April 1998. It was as a result of this information that I requested the further observations which were received on 14 and 21 August 1998.
5. A substantial part of the claimant's grounds for appeal related to the absence of these reasons. The Chairman's duty in relation to those is set out in Regulation 25 of the Social Security (Adjudication) Regulations (NI) 1995. Regulation 25(3A) provides:-

"A statement of the reasons for the tribunal's decision and of its findings on questions of fact material thereto may be given -

(a) orally at the hearing; or

(b) in writing at such later date as the Chairman may determine."

Regulation 25(3C) provides:-

"A copy of the statement referred to in paragraph 3A shall be supplied to the parties to the proceedings if requested by any of them within 21 days after the decision notice has been sent out or given, and if the statement is one to which sub-paragraph (a) of that paragraph applies, that copy shall be supplied in such medium as the Chairman shall direct."

6. The Chairman in this case had indeed recorded the reasons. The fact that they were not sent out immediately upon request was not due to any breach of the Regulations by the Tribunal but because the Independent Tribunal Service had omitted to send same out. There is no error by the Tribunal in relation to this matter and in any event the recorded reasons have now been sent to the claimant and there is no error in that respect.
7. The other grounds of appeal put forward by Mr O'Rawe on the claimant's behalf were that (1) the findings of fact did not provide a factual basis for the decision but were a mere statement of conclusions and (2) that there was no indication of the weight given to the evidence.
8. I find no validity in either of these grounds. The findings of fact clearly set out the Tribunal's findings in relation to the claimant's functional abilities under the All Work Test. These were set out on the document which has become known as the score sheet and which is headed "Summary of the Decision of the Tribunal: All-Work Test Assessment". The Tribunal made further findings of fact regarding the claimant's back injury.
9. The findings of fact which the Tribunal had to make were those in relation to the claimant's functional ability on the All Work Test and these were the findings which the Tribunal made.
10. As regards the second ground of appeal i.e. that no indication of the weight given to the evidence was set out, I again think that there is no validity in this ground. The reasons for the decision recorded by the Tribunal stated "The Tribunal accepted the impairment of function set out in the summary of the decision, as regards standing, rising and bending, having had regard to the claimant's own account and the evidence in the papers. The Tribunal found that the claimant's evidence about his ability to sit comfortably and to drive was not consistent with any impairment of function." It is therefore apparent that the Tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence in part and rejected other parts of it as being inconsistent. This it was perfectly entitled to do.
11. The Tribunal's duty as regards reasons for the decision is to make the decision understandable to a reasonable person reading same and who is aware of the evidence. Reading this decision as a whole it appears to me that the reason fulfil this standard. The Tribunal's decision is quite understandable and its assessment of the evidence is clearly set out.
12. Mr McAvoy opposed the appeal. He submitted that the Tribunal gave careful consideration to all the evidence and made proper findings of fact, gave adequate reasons for its decision and had not erred in law. I am in agreement with him. I therefore dismiss the appeal.

(Signed): M.F.Brown

COMMISSIONER

7 December 1998