Civil Courts: Tribunals

• Tribunals are specialist courts that operate alongside the court system - they handle over a million cases every year
• Tribunals were created after WWII as part of the development of the 'welfare state' to enforce people's social rights
• Tribunals are used instead of going to court, people cannot go to court as well unless they have exhausted the tribunal procedure
• Individuals are encouraged to bring their own case without legal representation
• The case of Peach Grey v Sommers (1995) confirmed that tribunals are inferior to the ordinary courts

The Composition of Tribunals:

• Most tribunals have a legally qualified chairperson and two lay members, who are usually subject experts
• No formal rules of evidence apply but rules of natural justice must be followed

Types of Tribunal:

• Administrative - this type of Tribunal deals with disputes between individuals and the
• Domestic - these are internal Tribunals used for disputes within private bodies, such as the Law Society and the General Medical Council
• Employment - these are the biggest use of Tribunals, and deal with disputes between employees and employers over rights under employment legislation

Tribunals can involve sex discrimination, immigration appeals, disability, employment appeals and more.

History of Tribunals:

• 1957 - Franks Committee recommended that tribunal procedures should be an example of "openness, fairness and impartiality". The recommendations were implemented in the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1958
• 1958 - Council on Tribunals was set up to supervise and review tribunal procedures. The Council was a body that would deal with complaints and submit recommendations for improvement. However, it was regarded as a "watchdog with no teeth" meaning that it had very little power to make changes
• 2000 - Sir Andrew Leggatt "Tribunals for Users - One System, One Service" - this report marked a radical reform of the Tribunal system, since Leggatt reported that Tribunals lacked independence, coherence and were not user friendly
• 2007 - Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act - this was the Act that formalised and implemented most of Leggatt's Reforms and contributed to the most radical shake up of the Tribunal system seen for many years

Leggatt's Criticisms:

• Tribunals not user friendly
• No uniformity of procedure
• Lack of accessibility to the public
• Lack of independence

Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007

Recommendation	Details
A Single Tribunal Service to be responsible for the administration of all tribunals	This makes the Tribunal Service independent of its relevant government department The support that the Service gives to Tribunals is unified both in procedure and administration
Tribunals should be organised into divisions grouping together similar tribunals	The Divisions that were created are: Education, Financial, Health and Social Services, Immigration, Land and Valuation, Social Security and Pensions, Transport, Regulatory and Employment Each Division is headed by a Registrar who takes on case management duties in line with the Civil Procedure Rules
The system should be user friendly	Users are encouraged to bring their own cases without legal representation Written judgements should be given in Plain English Information about procedures, venues etc. should be made freely available
Single route of appeal	There is a single route of appeal; with each Division having a corresponding Appeal Tribunal, and only then will there be a redress to the Court of Appeal

• The Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council replaced the Council on Tribunals which had operated since 1957 - its duties include:
• Keeping the workings of tribunals under review
• Reporting on the constitution and working of tribunals
• Considering and reporting on any other matter relating to tribunals
• The whole system is headed by the Senior President of Tribunals who is responsible for assigning judges to chambers
• Tribunal judges are appointed by the Judicial Appointments Commission
• The Tribunal Service was merged with HM Court Service to become HM Courts and Tribunal Service in 2010

Evaluation:

• Advantages:
• Cost - parties are encouraged to take their own cases without the need for representation. This has been made even easier with the availability of application forms online and a more transparent Tribunal Service since the reforms
• Expertise - at least one member of the Tribunal will be an expert in the relevant field, so this will save time explaining complex technicalities to a judge in coury
• Speed - There is a duty on the Tribunal Judges to take on case management duties, so they are able to impose strict timetables to ensure that most cases can be heard within one day
• Informality - Tribunals are much less formal than a court hearing, though they are more formal than other methods of ADR. The parties benefit from a private hearing and have the chance to maintain a relationship after the case is over
• Independence - Because of the involvement of the Judicial Appointments Commission in appointing Tribunal Judges, the Tribunal system is much more transparent, independent and thus fair. Further, the unified set of procedures and rules minimises the risk of inconsistencies between tribunals
• Disadvantages:
• Lack of funding - Legal Funding is available for some disputes, for example, if you are a member of a union, you may get your case paid for by them, but it is not always available, which can be detrimental to a person taking on a big company who has the benefit of the most expensive representation
• Delay - If the case is one of a complex nature, then there can be a delay in getting the case heard
• Intimidated parties - There is still the problem of parties feeling intimidated and daunted at the prospect of taking a case to "court", particularly without the comfort of having a legal representative
• Lack of precedent - Tribunals do not operate a strict system of precedent, so there is sometimes an element of unpredictability to the outcomes of cases

Structure of Tribunals