MN v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (II): [2026] UKUT 332 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision of Judge Butler on 30 December 2025.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
The First-tier Tribunal’s (FTT’s) decision refusing to extend time for a Statement of Reasons to be prepared involved material errors of law, including adequacy of reasons. SD v SSWP (ESA) [2017] UKUT 278 (AAC) applied.
There was also an error of law in terms of procedural fairness because the FTT placed reliance on the fact MN did not provide further details of the in-time request he said he had made, when he had not been asked to provide these.
The Upper Tribunal decided the decision about MN’s substantive appeal also involved a material error of law since, due to the passage of time, adequate reasons could not now be provided for it. SD v SSWP applied.