Tribunal system in the UK
Tribunal System in the UK
What are Tribunals?
Tribunals in the UK are specialized judicial bodies designed to resolve disputes in specific areas of law, such as employment, immigration, social security, and tax. They provide an alternative to traditional courts, often offering a more informal, quicker, and cost-effective way of resolving disputes.
Structure of the Tribunal System
The UK tribunal system is broadly divided into two tiers:
First-tier Tribunal (FTT): This is where cases are first heard. The FTT is divided into chambers specializing in different areas (e.g., Social Entitlement Chamber, Health, Education and Social Care Chamber).
Upper Tribunal (UT): This is mainly an appellate body that hears appeals from the First-tier Tribunal. It can also deal with some cases first instance.
Some cases may then be appealed further to the Court of Appeal or even the Supreme Court, but only on points of law.
Key Features of the Tribunal System
Specialist Knowledge: Tribunal members usually have expertise relevant to the case type.
Less Formal: Procedures are generally more flexible and less formal than in traditional courts.
Accessible: Tribunals aim to be user-friendly, enabling individuals to represent themselves.
Judicial Review: Tribunals’ decisions can be challenged by judicial review in higher courts, but this is limited to points of law.
Important Case Laws Related to the Tribunal System
Here are four landmark cases explaining important principles and the development of tribunal law in the UK:
1. R (on the application of Cart) v The Upper Tribunal [2011] UKSC 28
Issue: Whether a party has the right to appeal a decision made by the Upper Tribunal on a point of law.
Facts: The case arose when a decision of the Upper Tribunal was challenged on a point of law. The issue was whether such decisions could be appealed to the Court of Appeal.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that decisions of the Upper Tribunal on points of law can be appealed to the Court of Appeal with the court’s permission.
Significance: This case clarified the appellate structure and the scope of judicial review in the tribunal system, emphasizing that the Upper Tribunal’s decisions are not final if there is a point of law involved.
2. R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51
Issue: Whether fees charged for employment tribunal claims were lawful.
Facts: The government introduced fees for bringing claims to employment tribunals. UNISON, a trade union, challenged these fees as a barrier to justice.
Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled that the fees were unlawful because they prevented access to justice, violating the constitutional right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Significance: This landmark ruling reinforced the principle that tribunal systems must be accessible and not hindered by prohibitive fees. It impacted the tribunal system by emphasizing fairness and equality in access.
3. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody [1994] 1 AC 531
Issue: Procedural fairness (natural justice) in tribunal decisions.
Facts: Mr. Doody challenged the Home Secretary’s decision to set minimum terms in life sentences without providing reasons.
Judgment: The House of Lords held that even discretionary decisions must comply with natural justice, including the right to be given reasons in certain circumstances.
Significance: This case is a foundational authority on procedural fairness, which is critical in tribunal hearings. Tribunals are often required to give reasons for their decisions to ensure transparency and fairness.
4. Chandrasekaran v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 1353
Issue: Standard of review for tribunal decisions and the role of appellate courts.
Facts: The Court of Appeal examined how much deference should be given to First-tier Tribunal decisions in immigration cases.
Judgment: The Court held that appellate courts should not easily overturn tribunal findings of fact but can intervene on errors of law or irrationality.
Significance: This case clarified the boundaries of judicial intervention, respecting the tribunal’s fact-finding role while maintaining oversight over legal errors.
Summary
The UK tribunal system is a specialized judicial framework aimed at efficient dispute resolution in particular areas. The above cases illuminate key principles:
Cart confirms appeals on points of law from the Upper Tribunal.
UNISON protects access to justice against prohibitive fees.
Doody enshrines procedural fairness and the right to reasons.
Chandrasekaran defines judicial review limits on tribunal fact-finding.
RELATED Blog
0 comments