MG v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (CSM)

MG v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (CSM)

The First-tier Tribunal's decision was set aside because it failed to consider and explain the requirements of regulation 71 regarding income diversion and did not provide adequate reasoning for its findings.

Parties
Appellant: MG; First Respondent: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Second Respondent: DB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Upper Tribunal Decision on Appeal From First Tier Tribunal
Outcome
Decision of First-tier Tribunal set aside; case remitted for rehearing by a differently constituted panel
Legal Topics
Child Support Maintenance, Tribunal Procedure, Income Diversion
Social Security Law Child Support Child Support Maintenance Tribunal Procedure Income Diversion

Case Brief

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MG

Appellant

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

First Respondent

DB

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Upper Tribunal Decision on Appeal From First Tier Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First-tier Tribunal properly applied regulation 71 of the Child Support Maintenance Calculation Regulations 2012
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal explained its findings and reasoning regarding income diversion

Ratio Decidendi

The First-tier Tribunal's decision was set aside because it failed to consider and explain the requirements of regulation 71 regarding income diversion and did not provide adequate reasoning for its findings.

Court Disposition

Decision of First-tier Tribunal set aside; case remitted for rehearing by a differently constituted panel

Orders

  • The tribunal must undertake a complete reconsideration of the issues raised by the appeal and any other relevant issues.
  • The reconsideration must be in accordance with KK v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2015] UKUT 417 (AAC).