Regina v Social Security Commissioner, Ex Parte Chamberlain: QBD 7 Jul 2000

On an application to review an earlier incapacity benefit decision, the adjudicating officer or tribunal must first decide if a material change of circumstances existed since the decision, or whether the decision was founded upon some mistake. Only then should he pass on to question whether the ‘all work’ test is satisfied. The distinction between the two stages is clear and fundamental. Only if either limb of the first test applied could the second arise.


Lightman J


Times 01-Aug-2000, [2000] EWHC Admin 364




Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 25, 171C

Cited by:

CitedWood v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 31-Jan-2003
The appellant suffered cerebral palsy. Following a review, he was awarded mobility allowance, and then later the mobility component of Disability Living Allowance for life. He applied for the care element also. The respondent refused the care . .
CitedCart and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Upper Tribunal and Others Admn 1-Dec-2009
The court was asked whether the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court, exercisable by way of judicial review, extends to such decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) and the Upper Tribunal (UT) as are not amenable to any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.85561