The Court of Appeal upheld the primary judge's finding that the General Medical Assessment Tribunal denied natural justice to the claimant by failing to inform him that it disagreed with external medical evidence favourable to his claim, thereby depriving him of the opportunity to address the Tribunal's concerns. The Court confirmed that where a tribunal proposes to reject uncontradicted expert evidence favourable to a party, procedural fairness requires it to alert that party to its preliminary adverse view, following Alphaone. The Court also held that, while Osmond establishes no general duty to give reasons, the particular circumstances of this case — where the Tribunal's reasoning was unexplained and the claimant could not understand why favourable evidence was rejected — were sufficiently exceptional to engage a duty to provide reasons.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 13 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 13 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.