LAG (by her appointee LB) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP): [2025] UKUT 357 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Stout on 20 October 2025.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
The appellant has a diagnosis of Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder and Anxiety Disorder. There was evidence that she had been confrontational in social situations, including involvement in violent altercations. There was also evidence that the appellant was avoiding social engagement in order to avoid confrontational situations. The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by failing to provide adequate reasons for concluding that the appellant did not satisfy daily living activity descriptor 9d on a majority of days (“cannot engage with other people due to such engagement causing either: (i) overwhelming psychological distress to the claimant; or (ii) the claimant to exhibit behaviour which would result in a substantial risk of harm to the claimant or another person”). The Tribunal erred by proceedings on the basis that as the appellant had not in fact exhibited behaviour that posed a substantial risk of harm to herself or others on a majority of days descriptor 9d was not satisfied. The combined effect of regulations 4(2A) and 7 is that the descriptors need to be considered on the basis that a claimant is carrying out the activities as often as is reasonable for them to be carried out and, if the claimant is not carrying out the activities as often as is reasonable, the Tribunal needs to consider why the claimant is not doing so. If it is because of the claimant’s disability, then the Tribunal needs to consider whether the descriptor would apply on the majority of days if the claimant did in fact carry out the activity as often as was reasonable.