KU v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (UC): [2026] UKUT 38 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Markus KC on 28 January 2026 .
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
The appellant and his partner (P) had made a joint claim for Universal Credit. They failed to give correct information as to their caring responsibilities as a result of which the carer element was not included in the UC award. The appellant made a late application for revision but the Secretary of State refused to extend time and the First tier Tribunal dismissed the appellant’s appeal.
In allowing the appeal the Upper Tribunal decides that the FtT erred in law because in considering whether to extend time it applied regulation 36 of the Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013 (“the D&A Regulations”) rather than regulation 6. This was a material error because the FtT’s decision had turned on regulation 36(7)(b) of the D&A Regulations (which precluded account being taken of the appellant being unaware of or misunderstanding the law) but there is no comparable provision in regulation 6.
The Upper Tribunal also finds that the hearing was conducted unfairly because the judge repeatedly interrupted the appellant’s representative, failed to engage with her submissions, focussed on irrelevant matters, and failed to put to the representative the issue on which the FtT’s decision ultimately turned so that she was unable to deal with it.
The Upper Tribunal sets aside the decision of the FtT and remakes the decision allowing the appellant’s appeal, extending time for making the request for the revision and revising the UC award to include the carer element.