THE MOTHER OF a child with serious medical conditions has successfully resolved her High Court challenge over the Department of Social Protection’s refusal to pay her a care allowance.
In what is an important test case, which may have implication for large number of social welfare appeals that have been declined, the woman applied to the Department of Social Protection for the Domiciliary Care Allowance, which was refused.
The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, claims that her young daughter requires full-time care and attention due to the rare and challenging medical conditions she suffers from.
The mother claimed she is entitled to the monthly payment.
However her applications for the allowance were refused, firstly by the Department of Social Protection and, following an appeal, by the Social Welfare Appeal Office on two occasions last year.
In her High Court judicial review proceedings against the Social Welfare Appeal Office she claimed the decisions to reject appeal were flawed and in “serious breach” of fair procedures.
The mother had claimed that the Minister for Social Protection had wrongly included reports about her daughter from a medical assessor when it transferred the file to the Social Welfare Appeal Office.
The assessor’s report in respect of her daughter had been referred to by the Appeal Officer in their determination of the appeal.
It was claimed that the respondent had in other unrelated proceedings informed the High Court that medical assessors reports would not be included on any appeal file.
Any decision to alter that position, it was claimed should have been publicised to those making appeals to the Social Welfare Appeals Office, it was also claimed.
As a result of the assessor’s report being included, the mother claimed that she was not allowed to challenge the parts of that document that she did not agree with.
The report, she claims, was prejudicial to her appeal because she claims that most of the care needs she set out for her daughter had been omitted from the document.
It was also argued that the respondent failed to engage with or to explain why detailed evidence supplied by the mother was not accepted.
Represented by Feichin McDonagh SC, Brendan Hennessy Bl instructed by solicitor O’Neill the woman brought judicial review proceedings aimed at quashing the respondent’s decisions.
The case first came before the Court last year, when the mother was granted permission to bring her challenge against the Social Welfare Appeals Office.
The court was informed today that the matter had been settled, and that the respondent had agreed that the refusals could be quashed.
The applicant mother is also to be paid her legal costs.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say