Proposals for the Tribunal System - Assignment Example

? THE TRIBUNAL SYSTEM and Introduction Tribunals are described as bodies that are independent from courts with judicial or administrative mandate. Governments form tribunals and their conclusions are legally binding. Tribunals address special issues such as acts of war or genocide in order to avoid favoritism or manipulation. People invited to steer tribunals usually have experience in different fields often related to the case at hand in order to provide technical expertise (ADAMS A, 2006). Tribunals gained full judicial mandate in the twentieth century, initially they composed of one chairperson and two experts in the relevant field. Tribunals were perceived to be more user friendly compared to courts due to their low cost and speed. The independence of tribunals got a major boost by the enactment of the human rights act 1998, which provided their full mandate in determining civil rights and criminal charges. This however, raised concern and prompted Sir Andrew Leggatt to draft the 2001 review. This review proposed the removal of tribunals from their sponsoring bodies and a department under the Lord Chancellor be tasked with the responsibility for policy and operations. This department would not engage in any disputes before the tribunal. The 2001 review further proposed the placement of all tribunal members under the leadership of a senior president to advice, support, and improve information which would help users to represent themselves where possible. The proposals were accepted and the Tribunal Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 was drafted and a harmonized Tribunals service was formed in April 2006 for all UK tribunals. A tribunal council under 2007 Act was established and tasked with reviewing the administrative justice system (ADAMS A, 2006). Reasons for Formation of Tribunals Before the Second World War, various tribunals were created to deal with issues such as War pensions, unemployment benefits, and old age pensions etc. However, in 1957 the tribunal system was under scrutiny by the Franks Committee. Frank suggested that tribunals were cheap, easily accessible, less complex and employs expert knowledge. It is known that the growth of Tribunals took place in an ad hoc form to deal with specific needs and demands (ADAMS A, 2006). Types of Tribunals Tribunals are part of the civil justice system. Some Tribunals function under local authorities or under government institutions. Tribunals exist in various forms depending on the case at hand. They include; First-Tier Tribunal/ the Upper Tribunal The First-tier Tribunal deals with appeals against government and public departments decisions. The Upper Tribunal based on the law hears appeals from the First-tier Tribunals. The Tribunal judges are qualified and the members of the Tribunal are specialists in various fields such as doctors, accountants, ex-service personnel etc (ADAMS A, 2006). Education Tribunals They are formed to resolve disputes that arise between parents and the school system concerning their children. They include: School Admission Appeal Panel These panels exist for parents whose children are denied admission to their preferred school. It cuts across primary, secondary, and maintained grammar schools. The admissions authority has the role of admitting a child and complying with parent’s preference unless doing so would jeopardize the efficiency and proper learning of other children. The school has to have an admission limit beyond which injustices would arise (ADAMS A, 2006). School Exclusion Appeal Panels Parents have the right to appeal whenever their children are excluded from school. The powers of the panel will depend on the nature and length of the exclusion. Not every disciplinary case amounts to exclusion, for example offences committed away from the school site or exclusion based on medical grounds. The panel’s options include upholding exclusion or directing reinstatement (ADAMS A, 2006). Special Educational needs and disability Tribunal These Appeals are against the decisions of the local authority, on a child’s educational needs and issues concerning disability discrimination in schools. Parents can appeal against refusal by the relevant body to carry out an assessment on a child or to change a statement after re-assessment (ADAMS A, 2006). Employment Tribunals Employment Tribunals deal with employment issues such as discrimination in the work place, redundancy payments, and unfair dismissal from work. An employment Tribunal is similar to a court but is less formal where nobody wears a gown or wig (ADAMS A, 2006). Finance/Revenue Tribunal They resolve disputes that emerge between taxpayers and the revenue authority. They include: VAT and Duties Tribunal The Finance/Revenue Tribunal hears cases pertaining tax prepared by her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs {HMRC}. Individuals or organizations can lodge the Appeal. Pertinent cases entail both Direct and Indirect tax. The Tax chamber is independent and hears appeals against decisions made by HMRC relating to tax. The panel consists of legally qualified, non-legally qualified members or both (ADAMS A, 2006). General Commissioners These are local bodies independent from the government that consist of unpaid judicial officers who are appointed by the Lord Chancellor to act judges between the taxpayer and Revenue (ADAMS A, 2006). Special Commissioners They consists full time members appointed by the Lord Chancellor in consultation with the Lord Advocate, barristers or solicitors. Initially the proceedings of the hearings took place in private and decisions were not published until September 1994 when rules changed (ADAMS A, 2006). Health Care Tribunal They exist to protect the rights of vulnerable individuals such as the sick, the old and the mentally challenged. They entail; Mental Health Review Tribunal It forms part of the First-tier Tribunal Health, Education, and Social Care chamber. It reviews cases of patients detained the Mental Health Act 2007 to enable discharge of patients where proper procedures for detentions are not met (ADAMS A, 2006). Independent Residential Care This tribunal hears Appeals against decisions made by the secretary of state to restrict individuals from working with vulnerable adults and children (ADAMS A, 2006). Immigration Tribunals The immigration services commissioner and disciplinary charges against qualified persons involve these bodies in the hearing of appeals (ADAMS A, 2006). Land Tribunals Judges and members of this Tribunal decide on disputes pertaining land such as land valuation, land purchase and taxation (ADAMS A, 2006). Social security Tribunals They deal disputes such as child support, compensation recovery scheme and retirement pensions (ADAMS A, 2006). Transport Tribunals They hear and decide appeals against decisions of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors. It also solves disputes over postal charges between service providers and carriers. It also decides on appeals concerning packing penalties (ADAMS A, 2006). TCEA 2007 set objectives on Functions of Tribunals Decisions reached by Tribunals must be available in various languages and formats with details on possible outcomes and processes (KEENAN & SMITH, 2000) Tribunal users have a Right to independent access, quality advice, support, and proper representation. These processes must not be complex (KEENAN & SMITH, 2000) Tribunal users must have a right to an affordable and accessible appeal on a point of law. Tribunals need to be user friendly and suitable to the hearing of a dispute. Tribunal and Courts system Tribunals and courts do have some similarities; they include the use of experts in the panel. Both bodies are independent and try to resolve disputes. However, Tribunals and courts differ in various ways, they include, Tribunals are informal while court systems are always formal. Tribunal proceedings are also known to be less complex as compared to court proceedings. Tribunals are cheap and require few lawyers while court systems are expensive and often require adequate representation of legal experts (KEENAN & SMITH, 2000) Tribunals are usually open to the public while courts adhere to strict attendance list. Tribunals also take shorter periods as compared to courts, which take long durations to arrive at decisions. Tribunals are formed to address disputes in specialized areas while courts focus on a wide range of cases. Disadvantages of Tribunals Some regulations may be complex and in order for one to understand, legal advice may be required to help through an appeal. However, most people don’t enjoy government funding so this means that one has to incur the cost for legal representation. Tribunals usually do not give reasons why particular decisions are made, therefore making it difficult to make appeals (KEENAN & SMITH, 2000) Imbalance of power may result to one losing a case, for example in cases where one is fighting a business or government lead department with highly experienced lawyers who rarely loose cases. Proposed Tribunal Reforms Reasons for final decisions should be clearly stated in order to facilitate an appeal if need be. Before a case is heard, it is important to explain the complexity of the case to the users for adequate preparation (KEENAN & SMITH, 2000). Recommendations by Sir Andrews leggatt report. The report recommends that second tier tribunals to specify whether their decisions are binding on the lower tier in future cases and that there should be a right to a further appeal to a second tier tribunal in all jurisdictions but the grounds for a second appeal should be limited to points of law only, this would create new appeal rights in some cases and limit the scope of existing appeal rights in others. There should be a role to establish innovative techniques for the resolution of disputes by courts and Tribunals. Rules or procedure for Tribunals should incorporate an overriding obligation to deal with cases fairly and justly. The adoption of the overall approach of proportionate dispute resolution should be considered which seeks to prevent, reduce, and resolve disputes. A policy for provision of information, support and advice should be formed to tackle criminal, civil and administrative justice. It also suggests that, Tribunals should be excluded from judicial review. The Lord chief justice should be responsible for arrangements for the appraisal of Tribunal members. Training for tribunal members should be competency based and in addition to induction and continuing education this should include support through mentoring, performance and appraisal. REFERENCES ADAMS, A. (2006): Law for business students; Harlow, Pearson/Longman. KEENAN, D., & SMITH, K. (2000): Smith & Keenan's advanced business law. Harlow [u.a.], Longman. Read More