In the United Kingdom, a tribunal is a specialist court with jurisdiction over a certain area of civil law. [1] They are generally designed to be more informal and accessible than 'traditional' courts.
They form part of the national system of administrative justice, with tribunals classed as non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs). [2]
Examples of tribunals include employment tribunals, Office of Fair Trading adjudicators, the Gender Recognition Panel, the Planning Inspectorate and the Company Names Tribunal.
Though it has grown up on an ad hoc basis since the beginning of the twentieth century, from 2007 reforms were put in place to build a unified system with recognised judicial authority, routes of appeal and regulatory supervision. The UK tribunal system is headed by the Senior President of Tribunals. [3]
The earliest extant tribunal is the General Commissioners of Income Tax created in 1799. [4]
The UK tribunal system can be seen as beginning with the coming into force of the National Insurance Act 1911 which provided for adjudication of disputes by appeal to the Insurance Commissioners, and from there to a county court. During the twentieth century, UK government ministers acquired more and more power and were vested with decisions that affected the day-to-day life of citizens. [5]
In 1954, the government was embarrassed by the Crichel Down affair which focused public fears about maladministration and the abuse of executive authority. The magnitude and complexity of ministerial decisions had caused many such decisions gradually to be delegated to a growing number of tribunals and in 1955, the government used the debate created by Crichel Down to order a committee under Sir Oliver Franks to report on administrative tribunals and inquiries, though not ministerial decisions of the kind that Crichel Down had exposed. [6]
The Franks Report was published in July 1957 and its principal effect was to move tribunals from an executive and administrative model towards a judicial footing. Franks identified three principles for the operation of tribunals: [6]
Take openness. If these procedures were wholly secret, the basis of confidence and acceptability would be lacking. Next take fairness. If the objector were not allowed to state his case, there would be nothing to stop oppression. Thirdly, there is impartiality. How can a citizen be satisfied unless he feels that those who decide his case come to their decisions with open minds? [6]
The report resulted in the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1958 (6 & 7 Eliz. 2. c. 66) which established the Council on Tribunals, which started work in 1959. [6]
The council's principal responsibilities were to: [7] [8]
The Scottish ministers appointed two or three council members and three or four non-members to a Scottish Committee of which the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman were ex officio members. [7]
The Scottish Committee supervised certain tribunals operating in Scotland and had the right to be consulted by the council before any report about a Scottish tribunal or, in some cases, the right to report themselves to the Scottish ministers. [7]
The Council had no authority to deal with any matter over which the Parliament of Northern Ireland had power to make laws. [7]
Tribunals had long been criticised. Lord Scarman had seen them as a danger to the prestige of the judiciary and the authority of the ordinary law. [9] [10] In 1988 there were calls for an Administrative Review Council to provide independent scrutiny on the Australian model but such ideas were rejected. [11]
Though the system was little altered by the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992, at the start of the twenty-first century there were further calls for reform that led to the creation of the Tribunals Service in 2006, as an executive agency to manage and administer English and UK-wide tribunals. [12] [13] In 2011, this merged with HM Courts Service to form His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service.
In 2007, the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act created a new unified structure for tribunals and recognises legally qualified members of tribunals as members of the judiciary of the United Kingdom who are guaranteed continued judicial independence. [14]
The Tribunals (Scotland) Act 2014 created a new, simplified statutory framework for tribunals in Scotland, bringing existing jurisdictions together and providing a structure for new ones. The Act created two new tribunals, the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland and the Upper Tribunal for Scotland.
The Lord President is the head of the Scottish Tribunals and has delegated various functions to the President of Scottish Tribunals, Lord Woolman.
The most prominent tribunal is the First-tier Tribunal, which inherited the jurisdictions of many different pre-2007 tribunals. It is divided into several "chambers", grouped around broad subject headings. It appeals to the Upper Tribunal, which is a senior court of record. From the Upper Tribunal, there is a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, Court of Appeal of Northern Ireland, or Court of Session if in Scotland. [15] Together, the First-Tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal may be known as the 'two-tier system'. [16]
However, many tribunals are still outside of this system – for instance employment tribunals.
There are three legal jurisdictions in the UK: England and Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland. Some tribunals will cover the whole of the UK, whilst others will cover only one jurisdiction. This is because there are sizable differences between procedure in, for instance, Scots civil law and English civil law.
Some courts are duplicated in different jurisdictions, eg the Employment Tribunal.
The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 created a new unified structure for tribunals and recognises legally qualified members of tribunals as members of the judiciary of the United Kingdom who are guaranteed continued judicial independence. [17]
Most tribunal appointments are held on a fee-paid basis, but there are around 500 salaried Tribunal Judges. Most tribunal appointments are made through the Judicial Appointments Commission, and must meet the statutory qualification necessary for the particular tribunal. Their retirement age is 75. [18]
Tribunal Judges wear normal business dress, not robes or wigs.
Each tribunal (or chamber in the 'two-tier system') is headed by a Tribunal President. Chamber/Tribunal presidents can be selected from the ranks of existing High Court Judges (in the case of the Upper Tribunal jurisdictions) or through open competitions run by the Judicial Appointments Commission in the case of the Employment Tribunals and the Chambers of the First-tier Tribunal. [19]
Tribunals overall are headed by the Senior President of Tribunals, appointed by the King on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor. [15] Lord Justice Carnwath was appointed as the first holder of the post on 12 November 2007. [20] [21]
The office of the President of Welsh Tribunals was created by the Wales Act 2017 and the first senior judicial role which relates solely to Wales. [22]
Many tribunals use lay members alongside legally-qualified judges. These may be appointed by the relevant government department (as in the Copyright Tribunal) and will generally bring specialist expertise to the panel, generally on a fee-paid basis and are paid according to the number of sittings or days worked. Tribunal Members are normally appointed for five years initially and will usually have their appointment renewed for further periods provided that they are still willing to serve and considered to be competent. [23]
Tribunals are designed to be more informal than 'traditional' courts of law. They use simpler formats and less strict rules of evidence. [24]
Though often having procedures that very much resemble those of a court of law, common law and legislative rules about court proceedings do not apply directly to tribunals.
The majority of tribunals are designed to be accessible without legal representation. However, parties may choose to have a solicitor, barrister (or advocate in Scotland), or lay representation.
In some particularly niche tribunals, legal representation can be more common.
Some tribunals can award costs, but not all. Tribunals have limited powers (depending on the jurisdiction of the case) to impose fines and penalties or to award compensation and costs. Other types of tribunal decisions might result in the allowance or disallowance of a benefit, leave or refusal to stay in the UK, or about the provision of special educational help for school-age children. The ordinary courts enforce tribunal decisions in cases of difficulty, and tribunals do not usually hold funds or order deposits. [25]
Tribunals are not the only court-like organizations that operate outside the court system. There are organisations offering Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution, often with specialised adjudicators and formal procedures. These approaches differ because involvement is voluntary for both parties, and rulings are often non-binding.
Judicial independence is the concept that the judiciary should be independent from the other branches of government. That is, courts should not be subject to improper influence from the other branches of government or from private or partisan interests. Judicial independence is important for the idea of separation of powers.
The Courts of England and Wales, supported administratively by His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service, are the civil and criminal courts responsible for the administration of justice in England and Wales.
A tribunal, generally, is any person or institution with authority to judge, adjudicate on, or determine claims or disputes—whether or not it is called a tribunal in its title. For example, an advocate who appears before a court with a single judge could describe that judge as "their tribunal". Many governmental bodies are titled "tribunals" to emphasize that they are not courts of normal jurisdiction. For instance, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was a body specially constituted under international law; in Great Britain, employment tribunals are bodies set up to hear specific employment disputes.
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) is an independent public body which is responsible for the administration of the courts and tribunals of Scotland. The Service is led by a board which is chaired by the Lord President of the Court of Session, and employs over 1000 staff members in the country's 39 sheriff courts, 34 justice of the peace courts, the Court of Session and the High Court of Justiciary, and at the service's headquarters in Edinburgh. The day-to-day administration of the service is the responsibility of its chief executive and executive directors. The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service is also responsible for providing administrative services for the Judicial Office for Scotland, the Office of the Public Guardian, the Accountant of Court, the Criminal Courts Rules Council, and the Scottish Civil Justice Council.
The courts of Scotland are responsible for administration of justice in Scotland, under statutory, common law and equitable provisions within Scots law. The courts are presided over by the judiciary of Scotland, who are the various judicial office holders responsible for issuing judgments, ensuring fair trials, and deciding on sentencing. The Court of Session is the supreme civil court of Scotland, subject to appeals to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, and the High Court of Justiciary is the supreme criminal court, which is only subject to the authority of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on devolution issues and human rights compatibility issues.
There are various levels of judiciary in England and Wales—different types of courts have different styles of judges. They also form a strict hierarchy of importance, in line with the order of the courts in which they sit, so that judges of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales are given more weight than district judges sitting in county courts and magistrates' courts. On 1 April 2020 there were 3,174 judges in post in England and Wales. Some judges with United Kingdom-wide jurisdiction also sit in England and Wales, particularly Justices of the United Kingdom Supreme Court and members of the tribunals judiciary.
In most legal jurisdictions, a supreme court, also known as a court of last resort, apex court, and highcourt of appeal, is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts. Broadly speaking, the decisions of a supreme court are binding on all other courts in a nation and are not subject to further review by any other court. Supreme courts typically function primarily as appellate courts, hearing appeals from decisions of lower trial courts, or from intermediate-level appellate courts. A Supreme Court can also, in certain circumstances, act as a court of original jurisdiction, however, this is typically limited to constitutional law.
The judiciary of Pakistan is the national system of courts that maintains the law and order in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Pakistan uses a common law system, which was introduced during the colonial era, influenced by local medieval judicial systems based on religious and cultural practices. The Constitution of Pakistan lays down the fundamentals and working of the Pakistani judiciary.
The judiciaries of the United Kingdom are the separate judiciaries of the three legal systems in England and Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. The judges of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, Employment Tribunals, Employment Appeal Tribunal and the UK tribunals system do have a United Kingdom–wide jurisdiction but judgments only apply directly to the jurisdiction from which a case originates as the same case points and principles do not inevitably apply in the other jurisdictions. In employment law, employment tribunals and the Employment Appeal Tribunal have jurisdiction in the whole of Great Britain.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the Kingdom of Spain. Originally established pursuant to Title V of the Constitution of 1812 to replace —in all matters that affected justice— the System of Councils, and currently regulated by Title VI of the Constitution of 1978, it has original jurisdiction over cases against high-ranking officials of the Kingdom and over cases regarding illegalization of political parties. It also has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all cases. The Court has the power of judicial review, except for the judicial revision on constitutional matters, reserved to the Constitutional Court.
The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It provides for several diverse matters relating to the law, some of them being significant changes to the structure of the courts and fundamental legal procedures. Part 1 provides a scheme for radical overhaul of the tribunal system in the UK, creating a new unified structure with two new tribunals to embrace the former fragmented scheme, along with a Senior President of Tribunals. Part 2 defines new criteria for appointment as a judge, generally reducing the length of experience required with the aim of increasing diversity in the judiciary. Part 3 creates a new system of taking control of goods in order to enforce judgments and abolishes ancient common law writs and remedies such as fieri facias, replevin and distress for rent. It introduces a modern system of 'certified enforcement agents' and 'exempted enforcement agents' which includes civil servants such as court officers and County Court bailiffs, civilian enforcement officers and police officers. Part 4 makes some changes to attachment of earnings and charging orders to make recovery of debts more straightforward. Part 5 makes some changes to insolvency practice in order to provide low-cost protection for people who have previously been excluded owing to their small debts and lack of assets. Part 6 provides protection from seizure for foreign antiquities and artefacts on display in the UK and whose provenance is alleged to be broken by misappropriation. Such artefacts can only be seized on a court order that was compelled by a Community obligation or a treaty obligation.
The Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council (AJTC) was a non-departmental public body in the United Kingdom, responsible for supervising and regulating administrative justice and tribunals. It was created by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, and came into being on the 1 November 2007, under the chairmanship of Baron Newton of Braintree. It was abolished as of 19 August 2013 by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition Government under the Public Bodies Act 2011.
The judiciary of Malta interprets and applies the laws of Malta, to ensure equal justice under law, and to provide a mechanism for dispute resolution. The legal system of Malta is based partially on English law and partly on Continental law, whilst also being subject to European Union law.
The Judiciary of Spain consists of Courts and Tribunals, composed of judges and magistrates (Justices), who have the power to administer justice in the name of the King of Spain.
The Upper Tribunal is a superior court of record and general tribunal in the United Kingdom.
Scots law is the legal system of Scotland. It is a hybrid or mixed legal system containing civil law and common law elements, that traces its roots to a number of different historical sources. Together with English law and Northern Irish law, it is one of the three legal systems of the United Kingdom. Scots law recognises four sources of law: legislation, legal precedent, specific academic writings, and custom. Legislation affecting Scotland and Scots law is passed by the Scottish Parliament on all areas of devolved responsibility, and the United Kingdom Parliament on reserved matters. Some legislation passed by the pre-1707 Parliament of Scotland is still also valid.
The judiciary of Poland are the authorities exercising the judicial power of the Polish state on the basis of Chapter 8 of the Constitution of Poland. As in almost all countries of continental Europe, the Polish judiciary operates within the framework of civil law.
The judiciary of Scotland are the judicial office holders who sit in the courts of Scotland and make decisions in both civil and criminal cases. Judges make sure that cases and verdicts are within the parameters set by Scots law, and they must hand down appropriate judgments and sentences. Judicial independence is guaranteed in law, with a legal duty on Scottish Ministers, the Lord Advocate and the Members of the Scottish Parliament to uphold judicial independence, and barring them from influencing the judges through any form of special access.
The concept of the separation of powers has been applied to the United Kingdom and the nature of its executive, judicial and legislative functions. Historically, the apparent merger of the executive and the legislature, with a powerful Prime Minister drawn from the largest party in parliament and usually with a safe majority, led theorists to contend that the separation of powers is not applicable to the United Kingdom. However, in recent years it does seem to have been adopted as a necessary part of the UK constitution.
The Judiciary of Mexico officially the Judicial Power of the Federation is one of the three branches of government in Mexico, and the sole federal judiciary power. It is composed of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, which serves as its highest court, the Federal Judiciary Council, the Federal Electoral Tribunal, regional courts, circuit and appellate collegiate courts, and district courts.
paras.35-280
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)