header-logo header-logo

15 May 2012
Categories: Legislation
printer mail-detail

Social Security and Child Support (Supersession of Appeal Decisions) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/1267)

These Regulations reinstate powers to change decisions made by the social security appeal tribunals and the Child Support and Social Security Commissioners before their functions transferred to the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunals.

Commencement date
4 June 2012

Legislation Affected

SI 2001/1002, SI 1999/991, SI 1996/2907, SI 1992/1813 amended


Summary

Purpose

The Secretary of State, local authorities and the Child Maintenace and Enforcement Commission will now have the power to change decisions made under the old as well as the new regime.

Decision changes are usually made to reflect a change in the claimant’s circumstances since the tribunal made its decision.

Background

In November 2008 the Ministry of Justice legislated to abolish the social security appeal tribunals and the Child Support and Social Security Commissioners and transferred their functions to the new appeals system: the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal.

While the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Order 2008,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll