The provision of an interpreter for a deaf person was included in range of care needed for attendance for Disability Living Allowance. Dealing with his soiled laundry was not so included: ‘In my opinion it is not enough to ask whether the act in question is done with the aim of keeping the disabled person clean and comfortable and in decent conditions. No doubt an act of that kind is of help to the disabled person, especially if – as in this case – the disabled person cannot perform that act for herself. The care, consideration and vigilance which the act involves may indeed be of such a degree and involve such devotion to duty as to amount to attention, rather than mere assistance within the meaning which Dunn LJ gave to that word. But it must also be ‘in connection with’ the bodily functions of the person concerned.’ The phrase ‘bodily functions’ relates primarily to activities which the fit person normally performs for himself and which involve a high degree of physical intimacy
Lord Goff of Chieveley Lord Mustill Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde
Gazette 18-Jun-1997, Times 26-May-1997, Times 20-Mar-1997, [1997] UKHL 18, [1997] 3 All ER 844, [1997] 1 WLR 799
House of Lords, Bailii
Social Security and Contributions Act 1992 64(2)(a) 72(1)(b)(I)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Secretary of State for Social Security v Fairey CA 22-Jun-1995
A deaf person can be entitled to disability living allowance for the care needed in order to live a reasonable life. . .
Appeal from – Cockburn v Chief Adjudication Officer CA 30-Jul-1996
The extra and frequent attention to laundry for the incontinence of a claimant does not of itself warrant the provision of Attendance Allowance. . .
Cited – Regina v National Insurance Commissioner, Ex parte Secretary of State for Social Services; In re Packer CA 1981
Mrs Packer, a lady of eighty-three, claimed an attendance allowance under the Act of 1975 in respect of the cooking of her meals which she could not do herself. The Commissioner thought that eating was a bodily function and that cooking was so . .
Cited – Mallinson v Secretary of State for Social Security HL 26-Apr-1994
A blind person needing help (active personal service) in getting about in unfamiliar places may be entitled to attendance allowance. The court was willing to give ‘bodily functions’ a fairly wide meaning. Seeing was a bodily function. . .
Cited – In re Woodling; Woodling v Secretary of State for Social Services HL 1984
The question of law was whether cooking meals was ‘attention in connection with bodily functions’ for the purpose of attendance allowance.
Held: Though courts are willing to give ‘bodily functions’ a fairly wide meaning, it did not include the . .
Cited by:
Appealed to – Secretary of State for Social Security v Fairey CA 22-Jun-1995
A deaf person can be entitled to disability living allowance for the care needed in order to live a reasonable life. . .
Cited – Gregory Ramsden v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 31-Jan-2003
The claimant appealed against refusal of an award of the care component of Disability Living Allowance.
Held: It was not clear that the tribunal had properly applied the test laid down in Cockburn and the matter was remitted to be reheard . .
Cited – Mathieson v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 8-Jul-2015
The claimant a boy of three in receipt of disability living allowance (‘DLA’) challenged (through his parents) the withdrawal of that benefit whilst he was in hospital for a period of more than 12 weeks. He had since died.
Held: The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Benefits
Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.158893
