[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Northern Ireland - Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Northern Ireland - Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions >> [1998] NISSCSC A25/98(IB) (16 September 1998) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NISSCSC/1998/A25_98(IB).html Cite as: [1998] NISSCSC A25/98(IB)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

[1998] NISSCSC A25/98(IB) (16 September 1998)

 


Application No: A25/98(IB)

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992

SOCIAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTIONS AND BENEFITS

(NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992

SOCIAL SECURITY (CONSEQUENTIAL PROVISIONS)

(NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992

INCAPACITY BENEFIT

Application by the above-named claimant for

leave to appeal to the Social Security Commissioner

on a question of law from the decision of the

Belfast Social Security Appeal Tribunal

dated 9 September 1997

DETERMINATION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER

1. This is an application for leave to appeal against the decision dated 9 September 1997 of a Social Security Appeal Tribunal (hereinafter called "the Tribunal") sitting at Belfast.
2. An oral hearing was requested by Mr B... and was arranged for 30 June 1998, Mr B... did not attend. He was notified of the hearing on 16 June 1997. A letter dated 29 June 1998 was received (on that same date) in the Commissioners' Office requesting a postponement "for further evidence". The claimant did not specifically state what the further evidence was but it appeared to be medical evidence as he mentioned having to attend Mr A...'s clinic on 29 June 1998.
3. I refused to postpone the case and on that same date claimant was so informed by telephone. He then said he could not attend as he was at work and that his wife would telephone the Commissioners' Office to discuss options. She did not do so prior to the hearing.
4. My reasons for refusal of the postponement was that the Commissioner, in deciding an application for leave to appeal, could not consider evidence that was not before the Tribunal and that no error of law was disclosed in the correspondence including the Application for leave to Appeal to the Commissioner.
5. Mr B... did not attend the hearing on 30 June 1998. Mr Toner of Central Adjudication Services attended to represent the Adjudication Officer. He opposed the application for leave.
6. Mr B...'s grounds of appeal were set out in an OSSC1(NI) form dated 13 November 1997. Mr B... stated that he wished to appeal as the Tribunal had insufficient evidence. He then related events which had taken place after the Tribunal hearing and gave information about his symptoms.
7. Mr McAvoy of Central Adjudication Services, by letter of 7 June 1998, stated that Mr B...'s application did not identify an error of law on the part of the Tribunal. He submitted there was no error in the Tribunal's decision.
8. Having perused all the documents in this case, I am in agreement with Mr McAvoy. The Tribunal obviously carefully investigated this case, made findings on all material facts and clearly set out the reasons for its decision. The claimant obviously disagrees with the decision but that does not mean it was in error of law.
9. I did consider whether an adjournment would be appropriate to afford the claimant a further chance to attend. However in light of the very full setting out of the reasons for appealing and there being no error of law apparent on the face of the Tribunal's decision, I could see no point in so doing. I therefore dismiss the application for leave to appeal.

(Signed): M F Brown

COMMISSIONER

16 September 1998