The mother of a child with serious medical conditions has successfully settled her High Court challenge over a refusal by the Department of Social Protection to pay her a care allowance.
The case is regarded as a test case which may have implications for a large number of social welfare appeals that have been declined.
As part of the settlement, it was agreed the refusals to give her the allowance have now been quashed.
The mother, who cannot be named, applied to the department for the monthly Domiciliary Care Allowance, which was refused. She was again refused when she appealed the decision to the Social Welfare Appeals Office.
She claimed her young daughter requires full-time care and attention due to her rare and challenging medical conditions.
In her High Court challenge against the Social Welfare Appeals Office's decision, the woman claimed the decision to reject her appeal was 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 appeals officer in their determination of the appeal.
It was claimed that the respondent had in other unrelated proceedings informed the High Court that the medical assessor's 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.
As a result of the assessor's report being included, the mother claimed she was not allowed to challenge the parts of that document with which she did not agree.
The report, she claims, was prejudicial to her appeal because most of the care needs she set out for her daughter had been omitted from the document.
Represented by Feichin McDonagh SC, the woman sought to have the decision denying the care allowance quashed.
The case first came before the court last year, when the mother was granted permission to bring her challenge.
The court was informed on Tuesday that the matter had been settled, and the respondent had agreed that the refusals could be quashed.
The woman is also to be paid her legal costs, the court heard.
