[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 >> [1995] NISSCSC A3/95(DLA) (24 February 1995) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NISSCSC/1995/A3_95(DLA).html Cite as: [1995] NISSCSC A3/95(DLA)

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

[1995] NISSCSC A3/95(DLA) (24 February 1995)

 


Application No: A3/95(DLA)

RE: S... E... (CHILD)

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 SOCIAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTIONS AND BENEFITS (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 SOCIAL SECURITY (CONSEQUENTIAL PROVISIONS) (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 DISABILITY LIVING ALLOWANCE Application by the above-named claimant for leave to appeal to the Social Security Commissioner on a question of law from the decision of Newry Disability Appeal Tribunal dated 15 April 1994 DETERMINATION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER
1. The claimant in this case is the mother of S... E..., a child now aged 13, who suffers from asthma. She seeks leave to appeal against the decision of the Disability Appeal Tribunal sitting at Newry, confirming the decision of the Adjudication Officer given on review on 5 October 1993 that S... was not entitled to either the care component or the mobility component of disability living allowance from and including 6 April 1992.
2. The grounds of the application for leave to appeal are as follows:-

"The tribunal erred in law by making inadequate finding of

fact in reaching its decision in the manner described

on attached pages."

In the "attached pages" the claimant's representative, Mrs D( P( of F( & F(, Solicitors, of (, has reviewed in some detail the evidence which was before the Appeal Tribunal, and has explained why, in her submission their findings of fact were inadequate. Having studied the record of the proceedings I cannot accept that criticism. It is in my view clear that the Tribunal gave close and careful consideration to the issues in the case. The Chairman's note of submissions and evidence was, if anything, more comprehensive than one usually finds in cases of this nature, and in my opinion the findings of fact and reasons for decision dealt adequately with all the relevant issues. It should be borne in mind that a Tribunal is not expected to produce a record of reasons or findings in the detail or style of a court judgment, and having considered the points raised by the claimant in her notice of application and the attached pages I have reached the conclusion that they are without substance.

3. The claimant's application for leave to appeal to the Commissioner was also accompanied by a letter dated 10 November 1994 from her solicitors. In that letter reference is made to events which occurred and evidence which has become available since the date of the Appeal Tribunal hearing. I would point out that such matters can have no bearing upon this application. The question to be considered is whether there are any valid grounds for holding that the decision of the Disability Appeal Tribunal is or may be erroneous in point of law, and obviously they cannot be faulted for failing to have regard to events or evidence of which they were not aware.
4. Altogether I can see no grounds for holding that the decision of the Appeal Tribunal in this case is or may be erroneous in point of law and leave to appeal will accordingly be refused.

(Signed): R. R. Chambers

CHIEF COMMISSIONER

24 February 1995