TheSeniorPresidentofTribunals. AnnualReport: TribunalsTransformed

Transcription

1

2 TheSeniorPresidentofTribunals AnnualReport: TribunalsTransformed February

3 3

4 TheSeniorPresidentofTribunals AnnualReport: TribunalsTransformed TheSeniorPresident,SirRobertCarnwathCVO,speaking atthe2009ajtcconference ThisinformationisalsoavailableontheTribunalsServicewebsite: 4

5 5

6 Contents A tribunals chronology Tribunals structure chart Foreword Chapter 1 TribunalReform FiveYearsOn:areflectionfromtheSeniorPresident Chapter 2 Tribunalstoday:thestatutorystructures Chapter 3 Developingtribunallawandjurisprudence Chapter 4 Tribunaljudiciary:judgesandmembers Chapter 5 Thetribunalsysteminpractice:ajointenterprise Chapter 6 ViewsfromtheChamberandTribunalPresidents: Upper Tribunal AdministrativeAppealsChamber:ChamberPresidentMrJustice(Paul)Walker TaxandChanceryChamber:ChamberPresident MrJustice(Nicholas)Warren LandsChamber:ChamberPresident JudgeGeorgeBartlettQC First tier Tribunal SocialEntitlement:ChamberPresident HisHonourJudgeRobertMartin Health,EducationandSocialCare:ChamberPresident HisHonourJudgePhillipSycamore WarPensionsandArmedForcesCompensation:ChamberPresident JudgeAndrewBano Tax:ActingChamberPresident HisHonourSirStephenOliverQC GeneralRegulatory:ActingChamberPresident JudgeJohnAngel Other Tribunals under the responsibility of the Senior President EmploymentAppealTribunal:President MrJustice(Nicholas)Underhill EmploymentTribunalsforEnglandandWales:PresidentEnglandandWales EmploymentJudge DavidLatham;PresidentScotland EmploymentJudgeShonaSimon Chapter 7 TribunalsacrosstheUK Appendix 1 TribunalsJudicialExecutiveBoardanditssubgroups termsofreference Appendix 2 TribunalsJudicialExecutiveBoard subgroups:chairmen sreports Appendix 3 TheTribunalsJudicialOffice

7 7

8 Atribunalschronology 1957 TheFranksreportrecognisedthatstatutorytribunalswereanintegralpartofthemachineryofjusticein thestate. March 2001 SirAndrewLeggatt sreview:tribunals for Users calledforamoreunifiedtribunalsstructuresupportedby anindependenttribunalsservice. July 2004 WhitePaper:Transforming Public Services: Complaints, Redress and Tribunals. LordJusticeCarnwathappointed Shadow SeniorPresidentofTribunals. April 2006 FormationoftheTribunalsServicetoadministerallthetribunalswithinthethen LordChancellor sdepartment. July 2007 Tribunals,CourtsandEnforcementAct2007receivedRoyalAssent. November 2007 EstablishmentofAdministrativeJusticeandTribunalsCouncil. LordJusticeCarnwathappointedasfirstSeniorPresidentofTribunals. Transforming Tribunals:ConsultationonimplementationofPart1ofTCEA. May 2008 GovernmentpublishedresponsetoconsultationonTransforming Tribunals. TribunalsProcedureCommittee(TPC)established chairedbylordjusticeelias(thenmrjusticeelias, PresidentoftheEAT). June/July 2008 ChamberPresidentsofSocialEntitlementandHealth,EducationandSocialCareChambersappointed. ConsultationPaperImmigrationandAsylum:Fair decisions, Faster Justice proposedtransferofimmigrationandasylumjurisdictionstofirst tieranduppertribunals. November November( T Day ):Phase1Implementation: l First tiertribunal ThreeChamberscreated(SocialEntitlement;Health,EducationandSocialCare; andwarpensionsandarmedforcescompensation); l UpperTribunal AdministrativeAppealsChamber; l Existingtribunaljudicialofficestransferredtothenewchambers; l Swearing inoftransferred injudgesandmembersbegins. April stApril:Phase2implementation: l AbolitionofGeneralCommissionersforIncomeTax; l First tier TaxChambercreated; l UpperTribunal FinanceandTaxChambercreated. May 2009 GovernmentpublishedresponsetoimmigrationandasylumconsultationandconfirmedintentiontotransferimmigrationandasylumjurisdictionsintoFirst tieranduppertribunals. 8

9 June 2009 UpperTribunal LandsChamber,tookoverfunctionsofLandsTribunal. PresidentsforLandsChamberandWarPensionsandArmedForcesCompensationChamberappointed. August 2009 DeputyChamberPresidentsappointedtoHealth,EducationandSocialCareChamber. SeniorPresidentannouncedareviewoftribunalstraining. September 2009 First tier GeneralRegulatoryChamberphase1 l Charity,EstateAgents,ConsumerCreditandTransporttransferred. UpperTribunal FinanceandTaxChamberrenamedTaxandChanceryChamber. November 2009 MrJusticeNicholasBlakeappointedasPresidentoftheAsylumandImmigrationChamber,UpperTribunal(fromFebruary2010). January 2010 First tier GeneralRegulatoryChamberphase2 l Gambling,ClaimsManagement,Information,ImmigrationServices,AdjudicationPanelforEngland transferredin l FamilyHealthServicesAppealAuthoritytransferredintoHealth,EducationandSocialCareChamber. February 2010 EstablishmentofImmigrationandAsylumChambersinFirst tiertribunalanduppertribunal. April 2010 FinancialServicesandMarketsTribunalandthePensionsRegulatorytribunalstotransferintotheTaxand ChanceryChamberintheUpperTribunal. 9

10 Tribunalsstructurechart 10

11 11

12 Foreword ThisismyfirstannualreportasSeniorPresident.It marksthefirstanniversaryoftheestablishmentof thefirstpartsofthenewtribunalsystemon3november2008.howeveritiswrittenatatimewhenthenew systemisstillunderconstruction,asisapparentfromthe chronology.itisthereforeastoryofworkinprogress. Thisisnotintendedasaformalreportundersection43of thetribunals,courtsandenforcementact2007.under thatsectiontheseniorpresidentisrequiredtoreportannuallytothelordchancellor,inrelationtorelevanttribunalcases,onmattersthathewishestobringtothelord Chancellor sattentionandmattersonwhichthelord Chancellorhasaskedhimtoreport.Itistobenotedthat thisdutyisconcernedwithreportingspecificallyabout cases,ratherthanthefunctioningofthenewsystemin general.wearenotyetinapositiontoreportsystematicallyoncasesinthedifferentchambers,butihopethatby nextyearweshallhaveestablishedacommonformatfor suchreports.forthetime being,thelordchancellorhas notmadeanyformalrequestforreportingunderthesection. However,section43isinpartintendedtocontinuethe provisionunderwhichthepresidentofthesocialsecurity Tribunalsreportedannuallyondepartmentaldecisionmakingwithinthatsector.Thatpracticeiscontinuingbydelegationunderthissection.Inrecentevidence totheselectcommitteeforworkandpensions,thepresidentofthesocialentitlementchamber (Robert Martin)pointedoutthatinspiteoftheannualreports,thepercentageoftheDepartment sdecisionsoverturnedinthetribunalhasremainedlargelyunchanged.hesuggestedthatdepartmentalinternalreview processeswouldonlyworkiftheybroughtaboutgenuinereconsiderationandanewapproach: Theapproachshouldbenottosay, WouldIhavemadethesamedecisionasbefore? butrather, CouldIdefend thisdecisioninfrontofatribunal? Iseelittlepurposeinextendingthetribunalpresidents reportsondepartmentaldecision makingunless anduntilthereisaresponsivecultureinthereceivingdepartmentsandmachinerytogiveiteffect.myown dutyundersection43ofthetceawasdeliberatelyleftinratheropenformbecausewewereuncertainasto thepracticabilityorvalueofextendingthedutymoregenerallyuntilwearesurethatitwillbeuseful.we needtolooknowagainathowwecanmakethiswork. AtthesametimeasthisreporttheTribunalsServiceisalsopublishingstatisticsoftribunaldecision makinginanewform.historicallysomeusefulstatistics,suppliedbythevarioustribunaladministrations,have beenincludedinthecouncilontribunalsannualreports.withthesettingupofthenewunifiedsystemitis moreappropriateforthesetobepublishedbythetribunalsserviceitself.thesestatisticsgiveaforetasteof theofficialstatisticsserieswhichthetribunalsserviceintendtobeginpublishingquarterlyin2010 a. ThesestatisticsdemonstratetheincreaseinworkloadsfacingtheTribunalsServiceinanumberofjurisdictionsduringthiscurrentfinancialyear,notablytheEmploymentTribunalsandSocialSecurity.Alargepro a. 12

13 portionoftheseadditionalcasesresultfromthecurrenteconomicclimatealthoughtheintroductionofthe EmploymentSupportAllowancehasbroughtaboutasurgeinSocialSecurityappeals.Administratorsare doingalltheycantoconcentrateresourcesongettingcasesheardandmaximisingthenumbersoftribunal sittingdays;judgesandmembersareworkingwiththemtoensurethatcasespassthroughtheappealsystemasefficientlyaspossible whetherthatbebylookingatexistingprocessesorwaysinwhichtoresolve disputeswithoutformalhearings. Accordinglymyfirstreportseekstoreviewthestorysofar,drawingtogetherthemainthreadsofthetribunals reformstoryfromthecomprehensivereportofsirandrewleggattin2001tribunalsforusers, throughthevariousstagesofimplementationtothepresent.ihopethatassuch,itwillbeausefulreference pointtothepastforallthoseinterestedintheworldoftribunals,andwillmarkthestartingpointtothe nextstageindevelopment. ThereisalsofurtherinformationaboutmyroleasSeniorPresidentincludinglinkstospeechesandarticles onthetribunalsserviceinternet: Sir Robert Carnwath CVO Senior President of Tribunals February

14 Chapter1:TribunalReform Five YearsOn:a reflectionfromtheseniorpresident 1. InJuly2004theGovernmentpublishedaWhitePaper,adoptinginprinciplethemainrecommendationsoftheLeggattReportonTribunals.Onthesamedaywasannouncedmyownappointmentas Shadow SeniorPresidentofTribunals,toprovidethejudicialleadforthedevelopmentofthereformproposals,inanticipationoftheestablishmentofastatutorypostofSeniorPresident.TheTribunals,Courts andenforcementact2007(tcea)receivedroyalassentinjuly2007.innovember2007 Iwasappointed tothestatutorypostofseniorpresidentundersection2ofthetcea.on3rdnovember2008thenewtribunalsystemwasestablished.thepublicationofmyfirstannualreportisanappropriatetimetoreview myownexperiencesoffiveyearsofinvolvementinthereformproject. From Franks to Leggatt 2. Tribunalsinoneformoranotherhaveexistedforcenturies,establishedfordifferentpurposesand withoutanycommonformatortraditions.itwasnotuntil1957thatthefranks reportonadministrative tribunalsandenquiriessetthemoderntrend,which,inthewordsofprofessorwade,wastorecognisethat statutory tribunals are an integral part of the machinery of justice in the state, and not merely administrative devices for disposing of claims and arguments conveniently However,theproblemsofpiecemealdevelopmentandlackofcoherenceremaineduncorrected. Some40yearslater,theLeggattreportobserved: The present collection of tribunals has grown up in an almost entirely haphazard way. Individual tribunals were set up, and usually administered by departments, as they developed new statutory schemes and procedures. The result is a collection of tribunals, mostly administered by departments, with wide variations of practice and approach, and almost no coherence. The current arrangements seem to us to have been developed to meet the needs and convenience of the departments and other bodies which run tribunals, rather than the needs of the user. 4. BythetimeoftheLeggattreviewthereweresome60ormoredifferentjurisdictions,establishedat differenttimesinresponsetoparticularperceivedneeds,butmanynow moribund.theactiveonescoveredsubjectsasdiverseassocialsecurity,employment,asylum,tax,landregistrationandmentalhealth. Theywerehandlingwelloverhalfamillioncasesayear,andusingtheskillsofseveralthousandfull timeor part timetribunalmembers.thereportoutlinedtheproblemandtheproposedapproachtoasolution: In the 44 years since tribunals were last reviewed, their numbers have increased considerably and their work has become more complex. Together they constitute a substantial part of the system of justice in England and Wales. But too often their methods are old fashioned and they are daunting to users. Their training and IT are under resourced. Because they are many and disparate, there is a considerable waste of resources in managing them, and they achieve no economies of scale. Most importantly, they are not independent of the departments that sponsor them. The object of this review is to recommend a system that is independent, coherent, professional, cost effective and userfriendly. Together tribunals must form a system and provide a service fit for the users for whom they were intended. 2 Accordingly,thereportmadetwomainrecommendations:first,thecreationofanewindependenttribunal servicetotakeoverthemanagementofthetribunalsfromtheirsponsoringdepartments,andsecondlythe creationofacomposite,two tiertribunalstructure,undertheleadershipofaseniorjudge.inthisway,it 1.WadeandForsyth,AdministrativeLaw9thEdp906 2.Ibidpara1 14

15 washoped,tribunalswouldacquire:...a collective standing to match that of the Court System and a collective power to fulfil the needs of users in the way that was originally intended TheWhitePaperinJuly acceptedthegeneralthrustoftheleggattrecommendations,and setoutproposalsforimplementation.insomerespectsthewhitepaperwentfurtherthanleggatt.thereformofthetribunalsystemwasseenasbutonepartofthecommitmentacrossgovernmenttothebetter handlingofcomplaintsandproportionatedisputeresolution.theunifiedtribunalssystemwould: become a new type of organisation, not just a federation of existing tribunals. It will have a straightforward mission: to resolve disputes in the best way possible and to stimulate improved decision making so that disputes do not happen as a result of poor decision making. we need to go further and to re engineer processes radically so that just solutions can be found without formal hearings at all. We expect this new organisation to innovate. The leadership of the new organisation will have the responsibility to ensure that it does TheCouncilofTribunalswouldbereplacedbyanewAdministrativeJusticeCouncil,whichwould notonlyhaveasupervisoryroleoveralltypesoftribunals,butbecome an advisory body for the whole administrative justice sector,concernedtoensurethat the relationships between the courts, tribunals, ombudsmen and other ADR routes satisfactorily reflect the needs of users. 6 Constitutional upheaval 7. Inthemeantime,theLeggattproposalshadbeenovertakenbyothermorefundamentalchangesto thejusticesystem.injune2003,theprimeministerannouncedaradicalprogrammeofreformtoachieve institutionalseparationbetweenthegovernmentandthejudiciary.thiswastoinvolvetheabolitionofthe historicroleofthelordchancellorasheadofthejudiciary,andthetransferofmostofhisjudicialleadershipfunctions(inenglandandwales)tothelordchiefjustice.otherproposedchangesincludedthecreationofanewsupremecourtandanewjudicialappointmentscommission.thatledinjanuary2004to anagreementbetweenthelordchancellorandthelordchiefjustice,knownas theconcordat,which soughttodefineonaprincipledbasistherespectivefunctionsofthetwooffices.induecourseitsmainproposalswereembodiedintheconstitutionalreformact2005(cra),whichcameintoforcegenerallyon1st April Centraltothenewsettlementwasaguaranteeofjudicialindependence(section3),andasitscounterpart,thepivotalroleoftheLordChiefJusticeas President of the Courts of England and Wales. 7 His statutoryresponsibilitywasdefinedbysection7inthreeparts:(a)for representing the views of the judiciary to Parliament ;(b)for the welfare, training and guidance ofthejudiciarywithinresourcesmade availablebythelordchancellor;and(c)forthe deployment of the judiciary and the allocation of work. Hewasalsogivenoverallresponsibilityforjudicialdiscipline,underanewarrangementinvolvingtheestablishmentofaJudicialComplaintsOfficeandaJudicialComplaintsOmbudsman.Anothermajorchange wasthecreationofanewjudicialappointmentscommission,thecompositionofwhich,asagreedinthe Concordat,wasdesignedtoachieveaprecisebalancebetweenjudicial,professionalandlayelements. BaronessUshaPrasharbecamethefirstChairoftheCommission.Saveforjudicialdisciplineandthenew judicialappointmentssystem,thenewarrangementsdidnotapplytotribunals. 3.Ibidpara8 4.WhitePaper.'TransformingPublicServices:Complaints,RedressandTribunals',July Ibidpara6.1 4,19. 6.Ibidpara TherewereequivalentstructuralchangesinNorthernIreland,butinScotland,wherejusticewasadevolvedmatter,thechanges wereatthisstagemorelimitedseethejudiciaryandcourts(scotland)act

16 9. WritinginOctober Isaid: I think it is fair to observe that, at those historic negotiation sessions of Lord Woolf and Lord Falconer, when the Concordat was being hammered out, tribunals were probably not at the forefront of their minds. Conversely, when Sir Andrew Leggatt was preparing his report, he had no idea that a major constitutional change was in the offing. Consequently there is something of a conceptual gap. For example, the authors of the Concordat may not have had in mind that tribunal appointments would in numbers form probably the largest part of the JAC s work and probably the most complex, in the variety of jurisdictions involved and the different skills required (not just legal). There is the additional complication that some of them have jurisdictions extending beyond England and Wales 10. IalsonotedthatanimportantissueleftunresolvedbytheConcordatandtheCRAwastherelationshipoftheLordChiefJusticeandthetribunaljudiciary. the crucial sections 3 (guarantee of judicial independence), and 7 (responsibility of the Lord Chief Justice) at present define the judiciary in terms which are limited to the court judges. Schedule 14, which contains the list of tribunal offices, only applies to judicial appointments. Thus at the moment the tribunal judiciary are not included within the LCJ s responsibilities for welfare and training, or for representing their views to Parliament. Who then is responsible? The CRA seems to leave tribunals in limbo. For the time being, in the absence of any specific statutory provision, I assume that those responsibilities rest with the Lord Chancellor, or the relevant Departmental Minister. Under the Tribunals Bill, this needs to be sorted out. The Bill will provide the Senior President with a distinct, UK wide, constitutional role. In England & Wales he or she will be answerable to the Lord Chief Justice, in Scotland the Lord President and in Northern Ireland the Lord Chief Justice. But my own view is that the office of Senior President should be seen, not as a separate source of power, but as a link between the tribunals and those leaders of the judiciary as a whole the Lord Chief Justice s more general responsibilities for representing the judiciary, and for their welfare and conduct, should extend to the judiciary as a whole, including the tribunals 11. InaspeechinSydneyinApril2006 9, Idescribedtheresultingpositionas patchy : Thus the judiciary, of which the Lord Chief Justice is head, is defined in a way which does not include tribunal judiciary. On the other hand, the judicial office holders, to which the new JAC will be recommending appointments, will include most of the tribunal judges and panellists. (Indeed they will form the largest part of its work.) Similarly, tribunal judges are included in the new arrangements for judicial discipline under the Judicial Complaints Office. However, detailed rules have been agreed under the Act which will enable the bulk of ordinary complaints to be dealt with (as now) by the tribunal presidents, so that only the most serious complaints will be referred up to the Lord Chief s office. Meanwhile, the fundamental question of who, as between the Lord Chief Justice and the Lord Chancellor, is ultimately responsible for the tribunal judiciary has not in terms been addressed 12. IthadbeenhopedthattheseissueswouldbeaddressedintheTribunalsBill,adraftofwhichwas publishedin2005.howeverthebilldidnotintheeventfindaplaceinthegovernment sprogrammefor thatyear.tofillthegapitwasagreedthatthereshouldbeamemorandumofunderstandinggoverningthe relationshipoftheseniorpresidentwithlordchancellorandthechiefjustices.byspring2006adrafthad beenagreedinprinciple.inthatdocument,thelordchancellor,onbehalfofthegovernment,accepted thatthestatutoryguaranteeofjudicialindependenceunderthecrawouldbetreatedasextendingtothe tribunaljudiciary,butconfirmedthat: tribunals are, and should remain as, a distinctive part of the justice system, separate from the 8.SpeechtoJudicialConference ConstitutionalRevolutionintheEnglishCourts:Sydney,April

17 courts judiciary, with a special responsibility to provide speedy, expert and accessible justice in specialist areas of the law. TheSeniorPresident,asrepresentativeoftheChiefJustices,wasgiventhetaskofprovidingstrategicleadershipforthetribunalsjudiciary,andworkinginpartnershipwiththetribunalpresidents,andtheChief ExecutiveofthenewTribunalsService,todevelopandimprovethetribunalsystem.TheMemorandumalso confirmedtheresponsibilityoftheseniorpresidentforoverseeingtrainingofthetribunaljudiciary,incooperationwiththejudicialstudiesboard. 13. Bysummer2006ithadbeenovertakenbyfurtherdiscussionsontheTribunalsBill,forwhichitwas nowhopedtofindaplaceinthequeen sspeechlaterthatyear.theissueoftherelationshipbetweenthe SeniorPresidentandthechiefjusticesremainedunresolved.Itwascomplicatedbytheneedtoprovidefor thedifferentdevolutionsettlementsinscotlandandnorthernireland,particularlyintheformerwherethe CRAhadasyetnocounterpart. 14. Asindicatedinthespeechesalreadyquoted,myownassumptionhadbeenthattheSeniorPresident wouldbeunderthegeneralleadershipofthechiefjusticesineachofthethreejurisdictions,anassumption whichiunderstoodthemtoshare.howeverthatwasnotacceptabletothethenlordchancellor,lordfalconer,who,whileacceptingtheneedforindependencefromgovernment,sawthetribunalsystemasadistinctpartofthejudicialsystem,underanautonomousjudicialleader.hewaswillingtoacceptastatutory requirementofco operation,butnotoneofsubservience. Tribunals under the 2007 Act 15. TheTribunals,CourtsandEnforcementBillwasdepositedinParliamentinNovember2006andbecamelawinJuly2007. ThetribunalpartsoftheBillpassedbothHouseswithoutmajorcontroversy,and withallpartysupport.theonlysignificantareaofconcernwastheconditionsgoverningthetransferofjudicialreviewpowerstotheuppertribunal,andthestatusofthejudgeswhowouldbeexercisingthese transferredpowers.duringitspassagethroughparliament,withtheagreementofthelordchiefjustice, thebillwasamendedtoprovidethatthejudgepresidinginajudicialreviewcaseintheuppertribunal shouldbeahighcourtjudge(orequivalentinscotlandornorthernireland)orbyapersonagreedbythe SeniorPresidentandtherespectivechiefjustice.TCEAbecamelawinJuly Section1oftheBill,headed Independence of tribunal judiciary wasakeyprovision,whichestablishedthattribunaljudgesandmembersweretobetreatedaspartofthejudicialfamily,subjecttothesame guaranteesofindependenceastheircourtcolleagues.section2,inlinewithlordfalconer swishes,establishedtheofficeofseniorpresidentoftribunalsasanautonomousposition.furthersectionsimposemutualdutiesofco operationbetweentheseniorpresidentandthechiefjustices,onissuesoftraining,welfare andguidance(nowembodiedinsection47ofthetcea). Developing the new Tribunals structure 17. NeitherLeggattnortheWhitePaperhadproposedspecifictitlesforthetwonewtribunals.The WhitePaperhadevensuggestedthattheword tribunal mightberegardedasundulyformalandasdiscouragingaccesstojustice.itinvitedsuggestionsforalternativetitles 10, butnonewasforthcoming.the namesfirst tiertribunalanduppertribunalemergedinitiallyasworking titlesinthecourseoftribunal Presidents Groupdiscussions 11. Theyhadtheadvantageofexpressingreasonablyclearlyandsimplythe respectivefunctionsofthetwoinstitutions.thetceaadoptedthesenameswhenitcreatedtwonewtribunals:thefirst tiertribunalandtheuppertribunal. 18. Itwasclearthatthetwonewtribunalswouldneedtobesubdividedinsomewayinordertoprotect specialisationsandallowforamanageablejudicialleadershipstructure.leggatthadproposednine divisions inthelowertribunal.thiswasnotacceptedbythegovernment. 12 Insteadthestatuteprovidedan 10.TransformingPublicServices:Complaints,RedressandTribunalspara ThesenameswereinitiallyproposedbyGeorgeBartlettQC,PresidentoftheLandsTribunal,andsurvivedforlackofanypreferablesuggestions. 12.TransformingPublicServices:Complaints,RedressandTribunalspara

18 entirelyunspecificprovisionforthecreationof chambers eachledbyapresident.itwasagreedatanearly stagethatchambercontentwouldbedecidedbysubject matterorskillrequirementsratherthangeography. 19. Thechamberstructurewhichemergedwaslargelyjudge driven,havingbeenbasedinitiallyona systematicanalysispreparedbymarkrowland(thenasocialsecuritycommissioner).particularconsiderationswere,ontheonehand,theneedforarelativelysimpleandmanageablestructure,but,ontheother, theimportanceofprotectingspecialisationandcontinuityofservice.theproposedstructurewassubjectto publicconsultationintheautumn2007paper,transforming Tribunals 13,andwithonemajorexception 14, provedrelativelyuncontroversial. 20. TheEmploymentTribunals(ET)andtheEmploymentAppealTribunal(EAT)weretocontinueas separateentities,butalsosubjecttotheoverallleadershipoftheseniorpresident. TheAsylumandImmigrationTribunalwasinitiallyintendedtoremainasaseparatesingle tiertribunal,againundertheleadershipoftheseniorpresident,butproposalswerelaterdevelopedtobringthejurisdictionwithinthenew two tierstructure. 13.TransformingTribunals:ImplementingPart1oftheTribunals,CourtsandEnforcementAct2007CP30/07 14.TheexceptionwasthePensionsAppealTribunal.Thisimportantjurisdictionconcernedappealsrelatingtoarmedforcescompensationandpensions.Ithadadistinctiveformofpanel,consistingofalawyersittingwithtwomembers,onemedicalandone military.whiletherewasnointentiontochangetheformat,itwasnotconsideredlargeenoughtojustifyaseparatechamber. UndertheTransformingTribunalsproposals,the SocialEntitlementChamber wouldhavebroughttogetherthelargersocialsecurityandchildsupportjurisdictions,withthesmallercriminalinjuriescompensation,asylumsupport,andpensionsappealsjurisdictions.iwasconfidentthatwithinthislargerstructureitwouldbepossible,byappropriateordersandpracticedirections,to preservetheidentityandformatofthesmallerjurisdictions.however,thereweresignificantobjectionstothisaspectoftheproposals.althoughtheoriginalproposalsforthechambercontentwereconfirmedbygovernmentinitsresponsetothetransforming TribunalsconsultationofMay2009,oppositiondevelopedoverthesummerparticularlyintheHouseofLords,leadingtotheGovernment sagreementtothecreationofaseparatewarpensionsandarmedforcescompensationchamber. 18

19 Chapter2:Tribunalstoday:thestatutorystructures The Senior President 21. TheofficeofSeniorPresidentintheTCEAisanovelconstitutionalentityasanautonomousjudicial officewithukwideresponsibilities.inmyfirstimplementationreview 15 Inoted: The office of Senior President of Tribunals is entirely new. The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement ( TCE ) Act builds on the precedent set by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 ( CRA ) by confirming the independence of the tribunal judiciary, and by giving the principal judicial leadership powers to one judicial office holder with very extensive powers to delegate Unlike the functions of the Lord Chief Justice under the CRA, which are confined to England and Wales, the Senior President s responsibilities may extend to all or part of the United Kingdom, depending on the statutory extent of the each jurisdiction. Furthermore, the office of Senior President is free standing, as respects his functions under the TCEA. In particular, he is not formally subject to the authority of either the Lord Chancellor or of the chief justices. The TCEA requires the Senior President and the chief justices to co operate on matters of training, welfare and guidance. More generally, I expect to take my lead from the chief justices, as heads of the judiciary in their respective parts of the UK, on matters of common interest, so far as is consistent with my own statutory responsibilities As the senior tribunal judge and as a serving member of the Court of Appeal, I regard it as important that I should sit regularly in both capacities. Recent decisions of the House of Lords have emphasised the important role of the expert appellate tribunals in developing the law and practice in their specialist fields 16. The establishment of the new Upper Tribunal, as the normal route of appeal for most cases within the tribunal system, provides an unprecedented opportunity to build on the existing case law of the different jurisdictions and to develop a more coherent approach to the many common themes of tribunal justice. 22. MyappointmentasSeniorPresidentwasmadebytheLordChancellorwiththeconcurrenceofthe LordChiefJusticeforEnglandandWales,andhiscounterpartsinScotlandandNorthernIreland. 23. ThestatutoryfunctionsoftheSeniorPresidentaremodelledinmanyrespectsonthoseoftheLord ChiefJusticeundertheCRA.Theyconferwide rangingresponsibilityforjudicialleadership,including training,welfareandguidanceofthetribunaljudiciary,andforrepresentingtheirviewstoparliamentand toministers.theseniorpresidenthaspowertodelegatehisfunctionstootherjudicialofficers.akeyprovisionissection2,whichcanbeseenasdefiningthedistinctivecharacteristicsoftribunals.underittheseniorpresidentisrequired,inexercisinghisfunctions,tohaveregardtotheneedfortribunalstobe accessible;forproceedingstobehandledquicklyandefficiently;formemberstobe expertsinthesubjectmatterof,orthelawtobeappliedin,casesinwhichtheydecidematters andfordeveloping innovative methods of resolving disputes ofthetypethatcomebeforetribunals.theseniorpresidentalsoexercisesa numberoffunctionsdelegatedfromthelordchiefjusticeforenglandandwales.theseareprimarilyin relationtojudicialdiscipline,detailedbelow,butalsocoverthelordchiefjustice sfunctionsinrelationto medicalretirementsandextensionsofserviceunderthejudicialpensionsandretirementact TheSeniorPresidenthasawidepowerofdelegationundersection8oftheTCEA.TodateIhave generallydelegatedtochamberpresidentsthosefunctionsthatregulatethedaytodayrunningofthe chamber,forexample,thefunctionofchoosingparticularjudgesandmemberstodecidecases. Outsideof theseformaldelegationscertaintribunaljudgestaketheleadonparticularissuesonmybehalf para7 16.SeeegHinchyvSecretaryofState[2005]UKHL16,[2005]1WLR967paras29 30;Gillies(AP)vSecretaryofState[2006] UKHL2para36;AH(Sudan)vSecretaryofState[2007]UKHL49[2007]3WLR832para30. 19

20 25. TheCRAgavetheLordChancellorandtheLordChiefJusticejointresponsibilityforconsidering anddeterminingcomplaintsofmisconductbyjudicialofficeholdersinenglandandwales. AsSeniorPresident,IactastheLordChiefJustice sdelegateinrelationtocomplaintsofjudicialmisconductbytribunal judgesforwhomheisresponsible(althoughthelordchiefjusticeactspersonallywhereatribunalmemberistoberemovedorreprimanded). The Upper Tribunal 26. ThecreationoftheUpperTribunalisprobablythemostsignificantinnovationinthetribunalsystem.Theneedtorationalisethehotchpotchofappealroutesfromadministrativetribunalshasbeenhighlightedbyanumberofreports,includingtheLawCommissionreportonAdministrativeLaw,theWoolf ReportonCivilJustice,andtheLeggattreport.Thepreviousarrangementswereillogicalandincoherent, reflectingthepiecemealhistoricaldevelopmentofthetribunalsystem.appealsroutesfromfirstinstance tribunalsinenglandandwalesvariedbetweenspecialisttribunals,thehighcourt(administrativecourt orchancerydivision),andthecourtofappeal.insomecasestherewasnostatutoryrightofappeal,butjudicialreviewprovidedanalternativeremedyintheadministrativecourt;orjudicialreviewwasusedtofill thegapsinarestrictedstatutoryscheme.thereweresimilarvariationsintheformandnatureoftheappeal,forexample:whetheronlawonly,oronlawandfact;whetherleavewasrequired;andwhetherthe procedurewasprimarilyoralorwritten. 27. TheUpperTribunalallowsnotonlytherationalisationofprocedures,butalsotheestablishmentofa stronganddedicatedappellatebodyattheheadofthenewsystem.itsauthorityderivesfromitsspecialist skills,anditsstatusasasuperiorcourtofrecord,withjudicialreviewpowers,presidedoverbyasenior President.OvertimetheUpperTribunalshouldcometoplayacentral,innovativeanddefiningroleinthe newsystem,enjoyingapositioninthejudicialhierarchyatleastequivalenttothatoftheadministrative CourtinEnglandandWales.AsaresultoftheTCEAthereisnewflexibilitytodeploycourtsjudgestotribunalswherethereisaneedfortheirexpertiseandtheUpperTribunalisalreadybenefitingfromtheparticipationofseniorjudgesfromthecourtsinallpartsoftheUnitedKingdom. 28. AppealfromtheUpperTribunalistotheCourtofAppealwithpermission.TheLordChancellorhas exercisedhispowertoprescribethatsuchappealsinenglandandwaleswillonlybepermittedincasesof generalimportanceorforotherspecialreason(asforsecondappealsfromthecourts). 29. TheUpperTribunalhasworkedalongsidetheexistingdedicatedappealsystemsforasylumandimmigrationandforemploymentalthough,whenthetransferoftheAITtakesplace,anadditionalUpperTribunalchamberwillhearonwardappealsfromafirst tierimmigrationandasylumchamber.theeatwill continueasaseparatepillarofthenewstructure,presidedoverbyahighcourtjudge,butundermygeneralsupervisionastheseniorpresident.thecloserelationshipwiththehighcourtandaccesstotheexpertiseofexperiencedjudgeshasbeenmaintainedintheleadershipoftheuppertribunal. 30. IntheUpperTribunaltheLordChiefJusticehasagreedtotheappointmentofHighCourtjudgesas ChamberPresidentsintheAdministrativeAppeals,FinanceandTax,andImmigrationandAsylumChambers.MrJustice(Gary)HickinbottomwasthefirstpresidentoftheAACandhewassucceededinSpring 2009byMrJustice(Paul)Walker.MrJustice(Nicholas)WarrenhasbecomePresidentoftheTaxand ChanceryChamberandMrJustice(Nicholas)BlakewillbePresidentofthenewlyformedImmigrationand AsylumChamber.IntheLandsChambertheJACcompetitionledtotheappointmentofGeorgeBartlett, whohadbeenpresidentofthelandstribunal,toleadthechamber. The Upper Tribunal: Chambers 31. TheGovernment soriginalproposalsfortheuppertribunal 17 wereslightlymodifiedinthelightof stakeholdercommentsandoperationalneeds.theadministrativeappealschamber(aac)wasformedas plannedinnovember2008withthesocialsecuritycommissionerstransferringintothechamberas UpperTribunalJudges.TheAACisthelargestchamberintermsofbothitsworkloadandnumbersof 17.InTransformingTribunalsCP30/07para180to185andtheSeniorPresident sfirstimplementationreviewhttp:// 20

21 judges.themainpartofitsworkcamefromthejurisdictionsofthesocialsecurityandchildsupportcommissioners,butitalsoprovidesthenormalrouteforappealfromdecisionsofthefouradministrativechambersofthefirst tier(socialentitlement;warpensionsandarmedforcescompensation;general Regulatory 18 andhealth,educationandsocialcare). 32. InadditiontostatutoryappealstheAAChasalsotakenonjudicialreviewworkfromthosejurisdictions(onacasebycasebasis)aswellasjudicialreviewsinCriminalInjurieswherethereisnoonwardright ofappeal. 33. TheoriginalproposalsforaLandandPropertychamberweremodifiedtocreateaLandsChamber intheuppertribunalbysimplytakingoverthejurisdictionsofthelandstribunal.thatenabledthejurisdictiontocontinueitsworkwithminimalchange,whilehavingaccesstoamuchwiderpoolofjudgesfrom thecourtsandtheuppertribunal.thelandstribunalhadinrecentyearsreliedontheuseofcircuit judgeswithsuitableexperiencefromthecourtsystem,deployedbyagreementwithpresidingjudges,to helpdealwithafluctuatingcase load.sincethecrathishadnotbeenpossibleasonlythosejudgesand membersappointedtothetribunalwerepermittedtohearcases.thetceanowenablescourtjudgestosit inthelandschamberasrequested. 34. TheFinanceandTaxChamberwasmodifiedtoexpanditsjurisdictiontocoverothertribunalappealswhich,liketaxappeals,werepreviouslyallocatedtotheChanceryDivisionoftheHighCourt.Itwas renamedthetaxandchancerychamber 19. From1stOctober2009appealsfromthecharitiesjurisdiction (whichtransferredintothegeneralregulatorychamberonthesamedate)aretothischamber.thismodificationwasintendedtoprovidebettercontinuityforthejurisdictionsandprovideuserswithconfidence thattherelevantexpertisewouldbeavailableatappellatelevel. 35. ThejudgesoftheUpperTribunalTaxandChanceryChamberincludetheformerSpecialCommissionersofTax,andjudgesfromtheChanceryDivisionintheHighCourt(aswellastheircounterpartsin ScotlandandNorthernIreland)whomaysitbyrequestintheUpperTribunal 20. The First-tier Tribunal 36. IntheFirst tiertribunalthecurrentchambersandpresidentsare: l SocialEntitlementChamber: HisHonourJudgeRobertMartin l Health,EducationandSocialCareChamber: HisHonourJudgePhillipSycamore l WarPensionsandArmedForcesCompensationChamber:JudgeAndrewBano l TaxChamber:HisHonourSirStephenOliverQC(ActingPresident) l GeneralRegulatory:JudgeJohnAngel(ActingPresident) 37. TheTCEAmakesprovisionfortheappointmentofDeputyChamberPresidentsthroughaJACcompetition.TwodeputieshavebeenappointedtotheHealth,EducationandSocialCareChamber:Mark HinchliffetotaketheleadinthejurisdictionsofMentalHealth,andJohnAitkenforSpecialEducational NeedsandCareStandards. 38. Leadershipstructureswithinchambersasfaraspossiblemaintainthosethatexistedpreviously. Someofthelargertribunals(suchastheSocialSecurityandChildSupportAppealTribunalandtheEmploymentTribunals)haveregionaljudicialstructures,althoughthegeographicalunitsuponwhichtheseare baseddifferfromoneother(andalsodifferfromthetribunalsserviceregionsandareas).theseregional 18.SaveforappealsfromthecharityjurisdictionwhicharedirectedtotheTaxandChanceryChamber 19.Thetitle TaxandChancery reflectsitsukwidejurisdiction.althoughtheterm Chancery isnormallyunderstoodinengland andwalesasencompassingtaxcases,itisnotsounderstoodinscotland,wherethechamberalsohasjurisdiction. 20.TCEAsection6 21

22 postshavebeenretainedforthetime being. 39. Whereformalstatutorytitleshavenotbeenreplacedinthenewsystem,theyhavebeensubstituted bynon statutorytitles.thuspresidentsofformertribunalshavebecome PrincipalJudges oftheequivalentjurisdictionsinthenewchambers.thetitle PrincipalJudge wasintroducedbymeinmyfirstimplementationreview 21 whichalsonotedthatholdersofthatrolewouldalsobecomejudgesoftheupper Tribunal.ThatwasintendedtoensurethattheirspecialistexpertisewouldbeavailableintheUpperTribunalwhenneededandappropriate. The First-tier Tribunal: Chambers 40. Thefirstthreechamberscameintobeingon3rdNovember2008:SocialEntitlement;WarPensions andarmedforcescompensation;andhealth,educationandsocialcare. 41. On1stApril2009thetaxanddutiesjurisdictionsweretransferredintothenewsystematbothlevels.Thiswasthemostcomplexelementofthetribunalsprogramme,combiningtransferintothenewstructureswithwholesalereformoftheexistingfourtribunalsfordirectandindirecttaxation,aswellasthe introductionofanewinternalreviewprocessinhermajesty srevenueandcustoms.theestablishmentof thenewfirst tierchamberbroughttoanendtheworkoftheformergeneralcommissionersoftaxand theirclerks,whohadplayedsuchanimportantpartintheadministrationoftaxappealsformorethan200 years. HenryRussellOBE,JackLadevezeandRogerFellows,allformerChairman ofthenationalassociationofgeneralcommissioners,atthereceptionto marktheendofthe200 year oldtaxappealsysteminapril TheoriginaltimetableforthecommencementoftheGeneralRegulatoryChamberoftheFirst tier TribunalwasrevisedtoaphasedapproachwithtransfersinOctober andjanuary2010.thework ofthischamberislikelytoexpandwiththeimplementationoftheregulatoryenforcementandsanctions Act TheGovernmentalsomadeproposalsforaLand,PropertyandHousingChamber.Onlytwoofthese jurisdictions,thelandstribunalandtheadjudicatortothehermajesty slandregistry,arecurrentlyadministeredbythetribunalsservice.asexplainedabovethelandstribunalwastransferredtotheupper 21.para27 22.thosejurisdictionsareCharityTribunal,theConsumerCreditAppealTribunalandtheEstateAgentsAppealPanel,andthe TransportTribunal 22

23 Tribunaltoaddressitsurgentjudicialresourceneeds.Furtherplanningforthischamber,includingitsprecisecontent,timingandonwardappealroutes,iscurrentlyunderdiscussion. 44. Thenextmajorstepinthecreationofthenewtribunalsystemistheincorporationoftheworkof theasylumandimmigrationtribunalintothenewstructure,bythecreationofnewchambersateachlevel. ThischangewasannouncedbytheGovernmenton8May2009.Inrecognitionoftheshiftinworkloadthe newchamberswillbeknownasthe ImmigrationandAsylum chambers.aswellasprovidingastronger andmorelogicalstructureforthisimportantjurisdictionitshouldalsorelievethepressureonthehigh CourtandCourtofAppeal,bylimitingduplication,andrestrictingonwardappealstocasesofrealimportance.Majorstakeholdersarebeingcloselyinvolvedinthechanges,implementedinFebruary2010. The path to the creation of the new Immigration and Asylum Chambers Senior Immigration Judge Peter Lane 45. TheTransferofFunctionsoftheAsylumandImmigrationTribunalOrder2010comesinto forceon15february2010,abolishingtheasylumandimmigrationtribunalandtransferringits functionstothefirst tiertribunal.alsoonthatday,theuppertribunalassumesjurisdictioninrespectofappealsagainstdecisionsofthefirst tiertribunalinimmigrationandasylumcases.what wasasingle tierjurisdictionthusbecomesatwo tierone,incommonwithothertribunaljurisdictions. ThisisperhapsanappropriatemomenttoreflectonhowthedecisioncameabouttobringtheAIT whollywithintheschemeofthetcea.by2007,thevolumeofimmigrationandasylumworkinthe AdministrativeCourtwascausingseriousconcern,particularlyasregardsthenumberofapplications tothatcourtforreconsiderationofaitdecisions,followinginitialrefusalbythattribunalundersection103aofthenationality,immigrationandasylumact2002.asmallworkinggroup,jointly chairedbyrichardsljandlinhomer,wasformedinordertoexamine(amongstotherthings)how besttohandleapplicationsthatsoughttochallengefirst instancedecisionsofimmigrationjudges. Theworkinggroupconcludedthattherewouldbeadvantagesinreplacingthesystemofreconsiderationofsingletierdecisionswithatwo tierappellateprocess,wherebyinitialjudicialdecisionsinimmigrationandasylumcasescouldbeappealed(withpermission)totheuppertribunal. Aswellas havingthebenefitofplacingultimateresponsibilityforpermissionapplicationswithaspecialisttribunal,(whichwouldneverthelessbeabletocallonhighcourtinput,whereappropriate),thecreationofatwo tiersystemwasseentohavetheadvantageofenablinginitiallylegallyerroneous decisionstobere madeintheuppertribunal,therebyleadingtoareductionintheimmigrationand asylumworkloadofthecourtofappeal,whichhadalsoincreasedtolevelsthatwerecausingconcern. TheGovernmentwelcomedtheworkinggroup srecommendations,whichitsawasleadingtoamore efficientbutneverthelessfairandexpertsystem.inaugust2008aconsultationpaperwaspublished, invitingresponsesontheproposaltotransferthejurisdictionoftheaitinthemannerjustdescribed. Followingwhatwasseenasagenerallyfavourableresponse,theGovernmentannouncedinMay2009 thatthenecessarylegislationwouldbebroughtforward. TheTransferOrderisakeypartofthatlegislativepackage;butotherlegislationalsocreatesdedicatedImmigrationandAsylumChambersinboththeFirst tiertribunalandtheuppertribunal,and providesthenecessaryprocedurerulesforbothtiers. Procedure 46. TheTCEAprovidesforaTribunalProcedureCommittee(TPC) 23,withjudicialandpractitioner membership,tomaketribunalprocedurerules(tpr)forthetwonewtribunals. Itwasintendedthatthe TPCwouldbeabletotakeamorecoherentapproachtothedevelopmentoftribunalprocedureandthat, wherefeasible,tribunalprocedurerulesshouldbeconsistentintheirdraftingandunderlyingrationale. Thishasbeenborneout:newsetsofproceduralruleshavebeenproducedforallthenewchambers,with

24 consistentoverridingobjectives,acommondutytoassistthetribunal,andcoveringmatterssuchasdelegationoffunctionstostaff. 47. Parallelwiththerules,myownofficehasoverseentheproductionofPracticeDirectionsandStatements,madeinmynameorthoseoftheChamberPresidents,tobringtogethertheessentialpartsofthediversepracticestatementswhichformerlygovernedproceduresinthedifferenttribunals.Iamparticularly gratefultomyformerlegalsecretary,clareradcliffe,forco ordinatingthisworkandtothetribunalpresidentsfortheirfullco operation.sirpatrickelias(formerlypresidentoftheeatandnowlordjustice Elias)tookontheroleofChairmanoftheTPCfromitsinception.Theworkundertakenbyhim,theCommitteemembersandthelawyersandcivilservantswhosupportithasbeenremarkableintermsofitsquantity,qualityandthetimewithinwhichsomuchhasbeenachieved. Tribunal Procedure Committee - the Right Honourable Lord Justice Patrick Elias TheTribunalProcedureCommitteeischargedwithformulatingproceduralrulesfortribunalswhich havebecome,orarebecoming,partofthenewstructurecreatedbythetcea.section22(2)ofthe TCEAconferstherelevantpower.Section22(4)statesthattheCommittee srulemakingpowers shouldbeexercisedwithaviewtoensuring: l that,inproceedingsbeforethefirst tiertribunalsanduppertribunal,justiceisdone, l thatthetribunalsystemisaccessibleandfair, l thattherulesarebothsimpleandsimplyexpressed,and l thattheruleswhereappropriateconferonmembersofthefirst tiertribunaloruppertribunal, responsibilityforensuringthatproceedingsbeforethetribunalarehandledquicklyandefficiently. Wehavetriedtoholdfasttotheseobjectivesandinordertoachievethemwehavebeenguidedbythe followingprinciples:tomaketherulesassimpleandstreamlinedaspossible;toavoidunnecessarily technicallanguage;toenabletribunalstocontinuetooperatetriedandtestedprocedureswhichhave beenshowntoworkwell;andtoadoptcommonrulesacrosstribunalswhereverpossible,sothatrules specifictoachamberoratribunalarepermittedonlywherethereisaclearanddemonstratedneed forthem. l thatproceedingsbeforethefirst tiertribunaloruppertribunalarehandledquicklyandefficiently, WehavenotdrawnmuchontheCPR. Wherewehavedoneso,itismoretoidentifypotentialproblemsratherthantoprovidesolutions. MuchofthejurisprudenceoftheTribunalsiscitizenagainst thestateratherthanpartypartylitigation(althoughofcoursethetaxandlandschambershavesuch disputes),andoftenthelitigantisinperson. Theneedtokeeptherulesshortandsimple,andfor themtobeexpressedinlanguagetheclientscanreadilyunderstand,isofparamountimportance. Consultationisafundamentalpartoftherulemakingprocess. Thoseinvolvedinthedaytodaywork ofparticulartribunalsareoftenbestplacedtoassessthepotentialimpactofrulechanges. Wehave consultedwidelywithrespecttoeverysetofrulesandbenefitedconsiderablyfromtheresponsesto thoseconsultations;theyhavehelpederadicateerrors,identifiedproblemsintheinitialdrafts,and suggestedimprovements. Evenwhereproposedamendmentshavenotbeenadopted,theyhavefrequentlygeneratedimportantdebatesintheCommitteewhichhavehelpedsharpenthedrafting process. Thecommitteemeetsregularlyandhasawiderepresentation. ThereareappointeesoftheLord Chancellor(fromtheAdministrativeJusticeandTribunalsCouncilaswellasthosewithexperienceof practiceoradviceintribunals),theseniorpresidentoftribunals,thelordpresidentandthelord ChiefJustice. Amongstourmembersthereisexpertiseinalmostallthejurisdictionswehavehadto 24

25 consider,andonthefewoccasionswherethatislacking,wehavetemporarilydraftedanexpertfrom aparticularareatositasamemberofthecommitteeforthepurposeofassistinguswiththeparticularsetofrules. Debateislivelyanddiscussionrobust. Notalldecisionsareunanimous,butconsensusisusuallyachieved. Inevitablyexperiencewilldemonstratedifficultieswiththeoperationoftherules,orgapsintheircoverage,orsimplyruleswhichoughttohavebeendraftedbetterfirsttimearound! Therehasbeenconsiderablepressuretoproducetheruleswithinthetimeframegiventous,andwerecognisethatwe aresometimesmakingjudgmentswhichwillprovetobewrong. However,animportantsafeguardis thatthecommittee sremitistokeeprulesunderreview. Periodicamendmentscanbe andare being madetotrytoremedydeficienciesandtoensurethattherulesworkassmoothlyandfairlyas possibleandthatbestpracticeismaintainedand,whereappropriate,appliedthroughoutthesystem. 25

26 Chapter3:Developingtribunallawand jurisprudence Judicial review 48. OneofthemorecontroversialaspectsoftheTribunals,CourtsandEnforcementBillwasthepotentialitaffordedforthetransferofjudicialreviewcasesfromtheHighCourtandCourtofSessiontothe UpperTribunal. ThepurposeoftheprovisionistoallowtheUpperTribunaltohearjudicialreviewcases whereithasthespecialistknowledgerequired. 49. TheLordChiefJusticemadeadirectiontransferringtwocategoriesofjudicialreview. Thesearejudicialreviewsof(i)decisionsoftheFirst tiertribunalincriminalinjurycompensationcasesand(ii)any challengestodecisionsofthefirst tiertribunalundertribunalprocedureruleswherethereisnorightof appeal 24. TheLordPresidenthasalsotransferredjudicialreviewsofproceduraldecisionsoftheFirst tier TribunalfromtheCourtofSession 25. Furtherinformationontheexperienceoftransferredjudicialreview willbefoundinchapter6inthereviewoftheadministrativeappealschamber. 50. TheBorders,CitizenshipandImmigrationAct2009hasalsosubsequentlyprovidedthat fresh claim judicialreviewcanbetransferredtotheuppertribunal,subjecttodirectionbytherelevantchief justiceswhichrequirestheagreementofthelordchancellor. 51. Atthesametime,theprovisionofageneralrightofappealtotheUpperTribunalfromtheFirst tier Tribunalhashadtheeffectofredirectinganumberofcasesthatwouldpreviouslyhavebeenreviewable onlybyjudicialreviewinthehighcourt(ortheequivalentinthecourtofsession). Forexample,judicial reviewchallengestodecisionsofwhatwasthementalhealthreviewtribunalarenowgenerallyheardin theuppertribunalonappealfromthehealth,educationandsocialcarechamber. Reviewing First-tier decisions 52. TheTribunals,CourtsandEnforcementAct2007andtheruleshaveenableddecisionstobereviewedsothaterrorscanberemediedwithouttheneedforfurtherappealorjudicialreview.Thesechanges areoftangiblevaluetoourusersandtothetaxpayer.thishasprovedofparticularvalueinthemental healthjurisdictioninwhichspeedydecisionsareveryimportant. InmentalhealthpriortoimplementationoftheTCEAtherewasnorouteofappealotherthanjudicial reviewwherethetotalannualnumbersofapplicationswasroundabout30ayear.however,thereviewprovisionshaveproventobeaquickandcosteffectiveroutetocorrectingdecisionsandreducing thestressthatlongwaitsforhearingscancause. Example 1: Paneladjournscaseforfourmonthshavingmadefindingoffactthatarestrictedpatient hadaminimumof12monthsworkbeforedischargecouldbeconsidered.secretaryofstatewritesto tribunalseekingleavetoappealthisdecisionasitwasunlawfultoadjourntomonitorprogress.regionaltribunaljudgereviewsdecisiononpapers,setsitasideandordersanewhearingbeforeadifferentpanel.paneltakesplaceinfebruary,withnodischarge.inthepastthesecretaryofstatewould havehadtoapplytohighcourttoobtainexactlythesameoutcomeafteramuchlongerinterludeand atgreatercosttoallsides. Example 2: Applicationbyrestrictedpatient,convictedofarsonwithintent,heardbytheRestricted PatientPanelon18November2008whenthepatientwasconditionallydischargedintothecommu DirectionClassesofCasesSpecifiedundersection18(6).pdf erroroflaw:currie,rejudicialreview[2009]scotcscsoh_145 26

27 nity.thedischargewasdeferred.on22december,thesecretaryofstateforjusticeappliedunder rule46forpermissiontoappealonthegroundsthattheconditionastoresidenceinthecommunity amountedtoacontinuationofdeprivationoflibertyandwas,therefore,unlawful.itwasalsoclaimed thatthetribunalhadfailedtogiveadequateandintelligiblereasons.on13january2009,thetribunal sdecisionwasset asideonthegroundsasclaimedandremittedforhearingbeforeafreshly constitutedtribunal.casereheardon4march2009followingup datedhospitalreportsandfurther commentsfromthesecretaryofstate.patientnotdischarged. Undertheoldjudicialreviewregime,theTribunalwouldhaveinstructedTreasury Solicitorstorepresentitanditislikelythematterswouldhavebeenreferredtocounsel,atnotinconsiderableexpense tothetaxpayer.itislikelythatbothclaimswouldhavebeenconcededbutthepatientwouldhaveenteredasaninterestedparty.permissionapplicationswouldhavebeennecessaryanditislikelythat thematterswouldhavegonetoafullhearingrequiringthetribunaltoberepresented.theotherpartiestotheclaimwouldalsobeinvolvedinheavycostsmetbythelegalaidfund.onaveragethese matterscouldtakeuptosixmonthstoadecision. Example 3 inthespecialeducationalneedsanddisabilityjurisdiction thechairmanofthetribunalhadnotdeterminedwhetherornottheschoolproposedbythelocalauthoritywassuitableforthe child sneeds.ifitwasnotsuitablethenthepanelwasabletonametheschoolwantedbytheparents withoutfurtherconsideration.ifitwassuitable,caselaw(courtofappeal)requirescomparativecosts tobeconsidered.thisusuallymeansthattheparentslosetheirchosenschoolasefficientuseofresourcesmeansthatthelocalauthorityprovisionischeaper.byfailingtoconsidersuitabilitythere wasagapingholeinthedecision. Theoldreviewprocedureswouldnothavecoveredthecaseastherewouldhavebeennoreasonfor thechairtorealisehererror.iftherehadbeenastatutoryappealtothehighcourt,experience showedthattherewouldhavebeenaboutafourmonthdelayfromlodgingtheappealtothehearing inthehighcourt.thisdecisionwasquashedon16april,casemanagedonthe22andre heardon29 April.Thesavingintime(andstress)andcostisself evident. Using the new rules 53. Priortotheirtransferintothenewstructuresmanyjurisdictionshadoutofdateandmuchamended ruleswhichwereoftendifficultforusersandtheirrepresentativestofollow.wenowhaveuniformrules acrossthechambers,withvariationstotakeaccountofdifferentjurisdictionalneedswhereappropriate. Thisstandardisationwillallowformoreefficientadministrationmakingiteasiertotrainjudgesandstaff acrossanumberofjurisdictions.otherchangesofdirectbenefittouserswerealsomade. InSocialSecurityandChildSupportAppealsthenewProcedureRulesremovedtheadministrative powerof strikeout.insteadofanenquiryformissuedbythedepartment,nowthetribunalsservice issuesawelcominginformationleaflet,followedupbyareminderletterandanofferoftelephone contact.iftheappellantdoesnotrespond,thefileisreferredtoajudgetodecidehowthecaseshould bemovedforwardtoafairconclusion. Inmanyreferralsthejudgeisabletotakeanearlyviewofthemeritsofthecaseandmoveitstraight toahearingorgodownthepathofdismissingtheappealashavingnoreasonableprospectsofsuccess. Undertheoldrules,eachyear70,000appealswereautomaticallystruckoutbytheTribunalsService whenthecompletedenquiryformfailedtoarriveintime.eachyear20,000ofthoseappealswerereinstatedontheapplicationofappellantswhoexplainedthattheyhadneveractuallyreceivedtheform fromthedepartmentornotunderstooditssignificanceorhadbeenwaitingforanappointmentwith anadviceagencytogethelp.theother50,000appealsweresimplycloseddown,havingneverpassed throughjudicialhandsandregardlessoftheirprospectsofsuccess.bearinginmindthatsurveyshave shownthatone halfofsocialsecurityappellantslacktheconfidencetodealwithofficialforms,the enquiryformstrike outprocessprovedasubstantialhindrancetojustice. 27

28 Afterthefirstfewmonthsofoperationofthenewprocedure,ananalysisoftheresultshasshownthat some1,200appellantsayearwho,undertheoldsystem,wouldhavehadtheirappealsautomatically struckoutarenow,underthenewsystem,havingtheirappealsupheldbythetribunal. Anunanticipatedeffectoftheseproceduralchangesisthat,besidesupholdingappellants rights,they appeartohavemadeappellantsmoremindfuloftheirresponsibilities.undertheoldsystemanappellantwhodecidednottopursuehisorherappeal(perhapshavingtakenadvicesincelodgingthe appealanddiscoveredthatthecasehadnoprospects)mighttaketheoptionofsimplyignoringthe proceedings.sincethenewrulescameintooperation,therehasbeenadoublingofthenumberofappellantswhotakethestepofwritingbacktothetribunalsserviceformallywithdrawingtheirappeal, therebyavoidingwasteoftribunalresources. Example 1: MissBhadaskedforherincomesupportclaimtobebackdatedthreeweeksbecauseshe hadbeenawayfromhomedealingwithafamilyemergency.sheappealed.ittookthedepartmentfor WorkandPensionsninemonthstoforwardherappealtotheTribunalsService.Thecasewasflagged upwhenmissbdidnotrespondtothetribunalservice scorrespondencewithinthreeweeks.the judgefoundonthepapersthatdwphadappliedthelawincorrectlyandallowedtheappeal. Example 2: MsCawidowsufferingfromdepressionhadbeenfoundanewflatbyherfamilysupportworker.Herdepressionwassuchthatsheoftenlockedherselfawayinherflat,refusingtospeak toanyone.shewaslateclaiminghousingbenefitandinarrearswithherrent.herappealwasreferred tothejudgewhenshedidnotrespondtothetribunalsservice.thejudgeallowedherappealonthe papers. 28

29 Chapter4:Tribunaljudiciary:judgesandmembers 54. Bringingtogethertheindividualtribunalsintothenewtribunalstructureshascreatedalargepool ofjudgesandmembers.justbeforethetransformationprocessstartedtherewere(withinthetribunals transferringintothenewstructures)over7,000tribunalappointments,themajorityofwhich(over4,400) werefee paidorunpaidnon legalappointments.therewerealsoover2,250fee paidjudgeappointments 26.Inadditionthereare447 salariedjudgesandfoursalariednon legalmembers. ImagesfromtheSeniorPresident sannualconferenceinmay2009,held atthenecbirmingham 55. Ourinheritedrecordshavebeenbroughttogetherfromseveralsources.Myofficewillbetakingfor 26.Howeverthenumberoffeepaidofficeholderswasfewerthanthissuggestsasitwasnotunusualfortribunalappointeestohold morethanoneappointment. 29