100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
Administrative Law - Tribunals Summary $10.61
Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. Oxford University (OX)
  4.  
  5. Administrative Law

Summary

Administrative Law - Tribunals Summary
 6 views  0 purchase
  • Course
  • Administrative Law
  • Institution
  • Oxford University (OX)

Comprehensive summary/exam notes on tribunals in Administrative Law. This document covers the context which led to the enactment of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and an analysis of whether this legislation has resolved all problems. It also covers judicial oversight of tribunals, bo...

[Show more]

Preview 2 out of 5  pages

Document information

  • October 6, 2024
  • 5
  • 2022/2023
  • Summary

Subjects

  • administrative law
  • tribunal
  • tribunals
  • leggatt report
  • tcea 2007
  • jones
  • cart
  • privacy international
  • tribunals courts and enforcement act 2007
  • judicial review and courts act 2022

Written for

  • Oxford University (OX)
  • Unknown
  • Administrative Law
All documents for this subject (10)

Seller

avatar-seller
bethjscott5713

Content preview

Tribunals
1. Pre-2007:
During industrial revolution was a great increase in creation of tribunals – lot of
infrastructure had to be built to facilitate industrial revolution, especially railways,
and for this you need land.
People would inevitably lose land – in giving authority to railway companies
to seize land, tribunals were created to deal with disputes.
Welfare state expands:
Parliament starts legislating for more and more tribunals.
Grows up in an ad-hoc way – unsystematic.
If Parliament was legislating on eligibility for old-age pensions, then will
great a tribunal. If the next week they were legislating on education, they
would create another one.
Leggatt Report – 2001:
Lack of systemisation.
Lack of consistency – different structures, different compositions.
No unifying principle (Franks Report)
Basic things missing – no general duty to give reasons for decisions under
1950s.
Judicial oversight (role of HC) varied depending on legislation.
Before 1950s, ouster clauses were very prolific – most removed in 1958.
Lack of independence on part of these tribunals.
Common before 2007 for tribunals to sit in the Government
department that they were reviewing.
e.g., social security tribunal managed (before reform) by
Department for Work and Pensions.
Appearance and sense of justice.
Want to encourage people to bring meritious claims – public
distrust in Government.
Ability to act impartiality.
Mindset of decision-making is influenced by this connection
– institutionalised.
2. Reform:
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007:
Systematisation of many tribunals.
BUT – not all – some tribunals do continue to sit outside system.
e.g., Investigatory Powers Tribunal and Employment Tribunals.
2 tiers:
First Tier Tribunal:
Mostly does merits appeals, mostly looking at whether a
decision was rightly made.
Panel varies depending on dispute – combination of
specialist lawyers and non-lawyers.
Tribunal divided into 7 chambers.
Upper Tribunal:
Main difference = UT does not deal with merits appeals –
question is there a legal error – similar to JR.
Balance of lawyers and non-lawyers changes.
Lot more lawyers – not really looking at facts, often
very specialist.
Specialist legal expertise.
Hard-wired into wider court system.
Statutory right of appeal to CA – limited to points of law.

, Task of getting permission gets harder because statute uses second
appeals criteria.
IPT = different (Privacy International).
3. Are the problems resolved?
a. Yes, to a degree:
Increased independence:
New tribunal system was brought within purview of HM Courts and
Tribunals Service – quasi-independent government body.
s.2 TCEA 2007 – Role of the Senior President.
Usually very senior judge who sits at the top of the system
and in conjunction with the Rules Committee and other
bodies will make decisions about the general management of
the tribunals.
s.1 TCEA 2007 – extension of guarantee of constitutional
independence to Senior President.
More scope for procedural flexibility:
Each of the chambers within FTT and UT have their own set of
tribunal procedural rules – rules should be tailored to the particular
context/type of dispute being decided.
e.g., in tax – high degree of formality not a problem, because
usual party is either a corporation or very wealthy
individuals.
Vs immigration – high degree of formality not accessible and
prevents parties from being able to engage properly with the
issues.
Rules are created by Tribunal Procedure Committee.
s.22 TCEA 2007 gives guidance – rules should be created
with 5 aims in mind.
(1) Ensure justice is done.
(2) Ensure accessible and fair.
(3) Ensure proceedings are handled quickly and efficiently.
(4) Ensure rules are simple and simply expressed.
(5) Ensure rules confer responsibility on members.
Distinguishes JR from tribunals – tribunals created to promote greater
informality in how the processes operate.
Tribunals more accessible – JR is very expensive.
If we have more formal processes that are more adversarial in nature,
parties become reliant on lawyers – where costs come in.
Move towards inquisitorial, informal model – easier to access
process without a lawyer = benefit of tribunal system.
b. But there are still criticisms:
Relationship with JR:
Are we striking the right balance between JR and tribunals?
JR has drawbacks:
Lack of legal specialism – e.g., immigration, tax, social
security law.
Higher risk of error.
Formality of proceedings and dependency on legal
representation.
Expense and accessibility.
Tom Hickman – cost of JR = “public law’s disgrace”
Concerns about workload and delays.
Following the reforms, Gov has been removing rights of appeal to
tribunals.

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller bethjscott5713. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $10.61. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

52355 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now

Start selling
$10.61
  • (0)
Add to cart
Added