BH -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (CA): [2025] UKUT 423 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Grey KC on 12 September 2025.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
In this appeal against a First-tier Tribunal (F-tT) decision regarding Carer’s Allowance overpayments and employment status classification, I considered the F-tT’s approach to deciding whether the claimant (BH) was employed or self-employed in his work. The sole ground of appeal was whether the F-tT correctly applied the legal test distinguishing between employment under a “contract of service” (employee) or a “contract for services” (self-employed). I accepted BH’s argument that the F-tT wrongly treated payment through PAYE as determinative of BH’s status; it was the contractual relationship that was key. I also found that the F-tT was wrong to rely on the category of “worker employment status” for benefits computation, treating BH as employed despite having the status of neither employee nor self-employed. I took the view that this was inconsistent with The Social Security (Computation of Earnings) Regulations 1996, which recognize only two categories: employed earners and self-employed earners. The F-tT’s use of the broader “worker” definition, derived from other legislation, was inappropriate in this context. The case was remitted for further consideration of BH’s status.