PD v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP): [2021] UKUT 172 (AAC)

Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Poynter on 8 July 2021.

• From: HM Courts & Tribunals Service and Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)
• Published: 28 July 2021

• Categories: Tribunal procedure and practice
• Sub-categories: Tribunal procedure and practice - fair hearing and Tribunal procedure and practice - tribunal practice
• Judges: Poynter, R
• Decision date: 8 July 2021

Read the full decision in .

Judicial Summary

Tribunal procedure and practice바카라 사이트擳ribunal practice바카라 사이트擶ithdrawal of appeals바카라 사이트擟ircumstances in which a direction under rule 17(3)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008 may be given

Tribunal procedure and practice바카라 사이트擳ribunal practice바카라 사이트擟ircumstances in which a judge or tribunal member is excluded from sitting following an adjournment바카라 사이트擲W v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (ESA) [2019] UKUT 415 (AAC), R(U) 3/88, JH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and MH [2016] UKUT 158 (AAC), Midland Container Logistics Ltd [2020] UKUT 5 (AAC) and GO and HO v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council (SEN) [2015] UKUT 184 (AAC) discussed.

Tribunal procedure and practice바카라 사이트擣air hearing바카라 사이트擣irst-tier Tribunal바카라 사이트檚 duty to be, and appear, impartial바카라 사이트擯roper approach where fraud is a possibility바카라 사이트擴ndesirability of creating a perception that the First-tier Tribunal is hostile to one of the parties before it.

Published 28 July 2021