CH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions:
Judicial Summary
This appeal concerns procedural fairness and the approach that the Tribunal should take to the way in which it asks questions of those who are considered to be vulnerable. In particular, it cautions against asking “closed questions” to those who may find it difficult to elaborate on their answers to provide the Tribunal with the material needed. It also deals with issues of reasons and how Tribunals reach decisions
Case Overview
- Neutral Citation Number: [2025] UKUT 107 (AAC)
- Appellant: CH
- Respondent: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (SSWP)
- Decision Date: 22 September 2023
- Venue: Chesterfield Hearing Centre
Summary of Decision
- The appeal concerns procedural fairness and the Tribunal’s approach to questioning vulnerable individuals.
- The First-tier Tribunal’s decision was set aside due to errors of law and procedural unfairness.
- The case is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for rehearing by a fresh tribunal.
Key Issues
- Questioning Techniques:
- The Tribunal used closed questions which limited CH’s ability to elaborate.
- CH’s responses were deemed “vague” without proper follow-up.
- Evaluation of Evidence:
- The Tribunal failed to correctly evaluate the evidence provided by CH.
- CH’s difficulties were not adequately considered.
- Adequacy of Reasons:
- The Tribunal did not provide sufficient reasons for its conclusions.
- Specific examples of inadequate reasoning were highlighted.
Directions for Rehearing
- The new Tribunal should not involve previous panel members.
- The new Tribunal must not consider circumstances beyond the original decision date.
- Further written evidence should be submitted within four weeks.
- The new Tribunal is not bound by the previous Tribunal’s decision.
Conclusion
- The First-tier Tribunal made material errors of law, leading to procedural unfairness.
- The case is remitted for a fresh hearing to ensure fair evaluation and proper questioning techniques.
