Ramsden v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Ramsden v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

The Tribunal and Commissioner applied too rigid a test by excluding immediate cleaning of soiled clothing, bedding, and surfaces from the statutory concept of 'attention' in connection with bodily functions. Such acts, if performed immediately and in the presence or vicinity of the applicant, may qualify as...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Gregory Ramsden; Respondent: The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Social Security Commissioner to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; decision of Commissioner set aside; case remitted for rehearing
Legal Topics
Disability Living Allowance, Care Component, Bodily Functions, Personal Care, Statutory Interpretation
Social Security Law Disability Law Disability Living Allowance Care Component Bodily Functions Personal Care Statutory Interpretation

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gregory Ramsden

Appellant

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Social Security Commissioner to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal and Commissioner misapplied the test for 'attention in connection with bodily functions' under s.72(1)(a)(i) of the Social Security (Contributions Benefits) Act 1992
  2. 2 Whether immediate cleaning of soiled clothing, bedding, and surfaces due to faecal incontinence constitutes 'attention' under the statute
  3. 3 Whether the time spent on such attention amounted to a 'significant portion of the day'

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal and Commissioner applied too rigid a test by excluding immediate cleaning of soiled clothing, bedding, and surfaces from the statutory concept of 'attention' in connection with bodily functions. Such acts, if performed immediately and in the presence or vicinity of the applicant, may qualify as 'attention' and must be considered in assessing whether the statutory threshold of a 'significant portion of the day' is met. The Tribunal's failure to properly consider these aspects rendered its decision defective and necessitated a rehearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; decision of Commissioner set aside; case remitted for rehearing

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs to be assessed
  • Appeal remitted to a differently constituted tribunal for rehearing