CA v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and TB (CSM): [2020] UKUT 205 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision of Judge Poynter on 14 April 2020.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
“Revisions, supersessions and reviews—Change of circumstances—identifying which change of circumstances is “material”. Revisions, supersessions and reviews—Date of effect of decision—whether it is possible for the Secretary of State to supersede on own initiative where no notice given under regulation 24 of the Child Support (Maintenance Assessment Procedure) Regulations 1992. Revisions, supersessions and reviews—Date of effect of decision—inconsistency between regulations 23(6) and 24 of the Child Support (Maintenance Assessment Procedure) Regulations 1992 taken together, and regulation 23(19). Tribunal procedure and practice (including Upper tribunal)—Other—Judicial exercise of the discretion conferred by section 17(2) of the Child Support Act 1991 not consider any issue that is not raised by the application to supersede, or did not cause the Secretary of State to act on his own initiative. Tribunal procedure and practice (including Upper tribunal)—Other—Whether rule 24 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008 requires that, in change of circumstances cases, the Secretary of State’s response should include the calculations for the superseded decision as well as the superseding decision.”