[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 >> [1999] NISSCSC C8/99(JSA) (28 September 1999) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NISSCSC/1999/C8_99(JSA).html Cite as: [1999] NISSCSC C8/99(JSA)

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

[1999] NISSCSC C8/99(JSA) (28 September 1999)

 


Decision No: C8/99(JSA)

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 SOCIAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTIONS AND BENEFITS (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992
SOCIAL SECURITY (CONSEQUENTIAL PROVISIONS) (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 SOCIAL SECURITY (NORTHERN IRELAND) ORDER 1998
JOBSEEKERS ALLOWANCE
Application by the claimant for leave to appeal and appeal to a Social Security Commissioner on a question of law from a Tribunal's decision dated 9 July 1998
DECISION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER
1. This is an application by Mr H... for leave to appeal against a decision dated 9 July 1998 of a Social Security Appeal Tribunal (hereinafter called "the Tribunal") sitting at Belfast. That Tribunal dismissed Mr H...'s appeal which the Tribunal appeared to consider was against an Adjudication Officer's decision dated 16 July 1997. The decision of 16 July 1997 was that Mr H... was not entitled to Jobseekers Allowance from 21 May 1997 to 24 June 1997 (both dates inclusive). The reason given by the Adjudication Officer was that the claim for that period made on 4 July 1997 was not made within the time limit for claiming and the time limit for claiming could not be extended because Mr H... had not proved that he could not reasonably have been expected to make his claim from an earlier date.
2. Mr H... set out his grounds for appealing against the Tribunal decision of 9 July 1998 on an OSSC1 (NI) form dated 23 November 1998. This was an application requiring special reasons and I accepted the application for special reasons.
3. I then arranged an oral hearing of the application which was attended by Mr H... and by Mrs McRory of DMA Unit, representing the Adjudication Officer. At hearing I granted leave and with the consent of the parties treat and determine the matter as an appeal. I am grateful to Mrs McRory for the very considerable work that she has put into the clarification of a confusing situation. To try to clarify this matter it is necessary to trace the facts of the case, many of which are not in dispute.
4. Mr H... has been claiming benefit since 29 August 1995. On 14 June 1997 Mr H...'s claim to Jobseekers Allowance was terminated from 21 May 1997 as Mr H... had not entered into a Jobseekers Agreement from that date. On 25 June 1997 Mr H... made a new claim to Jobseekers Allowance at Shaftesbury Square Social Security Office. He appears, though I am not sure of this, to have been awarded Jobseekers Allowance from 25 June 1997. On 16 July 1997 Mr H... made a request to have his Jobseekers Allowance claim back-dated for the period 21 May 1997 to 24 June 1997. On 16 July 1997 the Adjudication Officer disallowed this request for back-dating and gave the decision indicated more fully above. On 28 July 1997 Mr H...'s solicitor lodged an appeal against the decision disallowing Jobseekers Allowance from 21 May 1997 to 24 June 1997. This purported appeal contained no reasons for the appeal and on 4 September 1997 was ruled invalid by the Chairman of the Social Security Appeal Tribunal. The purported appeal which was ruled invalid appears to have been against the decision of 16 July 1997.
5. On 27 February 1998 Mr H... himself wrote and stated:-

"I wish to lodge an appeal against the decision to withhold

benefit for the period 21 May '97 - 24 June '97.

The decision to withhold benefit was taken on the basis that

I had failed to attend an interview that I had been informed

of in a letter issued on 4.6.97. No such letter was

ever received by me. As it was myself who had in fact

requested an interview when I attended Conor buildings on

3.6.97, I would have had no reason for failing to

attend. I had waited a reply following this meeting and

when it had not arrived I contacted the office on

17.6.97. I was then informed that my benefit had

been stopped. A letter dated 13.6.97 arrived on

19.6.97 informing me of the decision. I appealed

this original decision which I have recently been

informed had not been heard. This was indicated to me

in a letter from the Tribunal dated 20.2.98.

It referred to an earlier letter dated 15.9.97.

I have since obtained a copy of that letter from the

solicitor who was supposed to be dealing with the matter

but there is no indication which period it refers to.

I have been waiting ever since for this appeal to be

heard, not knowing that it had been considered "invalid".

I was in fact informed by the solicitor that the date

for the hearing had been set for 21.1.98. Under these

circumstances I wish the appeal to be reconsidered."

6. Following this a Tribunal Chairman made a ruling on 3 June 1997 which was headed as follows:-

"Appellant's name: Derek H... Ref No: BE1208/98S

Adjudication Officer's Decision issued: 14.6.97

Date appeal lodged: 6/3/98

DECISION

I have considered the application for an extension of time in

which to appeal and have concluded that the time limit for

appealing can be extended. I therefore admit the appeal for

hearing."

7. It can therefore be seen that the Tribunal Chairman by this ruling extended the time for appealing against the decision of 14 June 1997 ie the original decision disallowing benefit to Mr H.... Mrs McRory thought it was actually the Chairman's intention to extend the time to appeal the decision of 16 July 1997. There is no evidence that that was so and in fact he extended the time to appeal against the decision of 14 June 1997.
8. For reasons which are not clear and which may relate to the terms of Mr H...'s own appeal letter this Chairman's decision appears to have been treated as an extension of time to appeal the decision of 16 July 1997. In fact it is quite clear from reading Mr H...'s appeal letter that he was referring to the original decision to stop benefit ie the decision of 14 June 1997. The confusion may have arisen because of the terminal date of 24 June 1997 referred to. It appears that on his reclaim Mr H... was awarded benefit from 24 June 1997. In any event when the Adjudication Officer prepared his submission to the Tribunal it was in relation to the decision of 16 July 1997 and it was on that basis that the Tribunal dealt with the matter at hearing.
9. When Mr H... attended the Tribunal hearing he continued to make contentions in relation to the stopping of his benefit by the decision on 14 June 1997. The officer dealt with the matter on foot of the decision of 16 July 1997 and the Tribunal appears also to have done so. In fact the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to deal with the decision of 16 July 1997 there having been an earlier Tribunal Chairman's ruling that the purported appeal against that decision was invalid and there having been no extension of time by a Tribunal Chairman for the making of a late appeal against the decision of 16 July 1997.
10. The Tribunal decision of 9 July 1998 appears to have been made without any jurisdiction there being no valid appeal in existence against that decision. I therefore declare the Tribunal's decision of 9 July 1998 a nullity. This leaves outstanding Mr H...'s appeal against the decision of 14 June 1997. That appeal will now have to be dealt with by a newly constituted Tribunal and I would hope that this matter will be dealt with as speedily as possible in light of the lengthy lapse of time.

(Signed): M F Brown

COMMISSIONER

28 September 1999