Regulation 35(2)b of ESA Regulations and subsequent submissions by SoS following this precedent

These paragraphs from a submission made by the Secretary of State are a new indication of how the Secretary of State is attempting to meet the requirements as set out by the decision of IM v SSWP (ESA) [2014] UKUT 412 (AAC). The Secretary of State in the paragraphs 16 to 17 of this submission considers that the most demanding work-related activity would be a referral to Disability Action Dundee.  The least demanding work-related activity everyday would be leaving the house every day.

Suffice to say that the appellant met the requirements not under regulation 35(2b) but under descriptor 1 of schedule 3.  Given the Secretary of State at para 17 when considering work-related activity least demanding stated “ I believe having Mr ….. walk even a couple of metres from his home would benefit him physically….” it is not surprising the First tier Tribunal decision of a schedule 3 mobility descriptor.

I would further add that over the last 4 weeks all other ESA appeal papers have not contained such detail and have returned to “Eastern and Central Scotland” work-related activity provision, which a Regional Judge at First tier Tribunal considered did not meet the requirements of IM.”

Tom Lamb Dundee North Law Centre

Facebooktwittermail