i have a case where the tribunal chair, upon leave to appeal request has admitted there was an error of law but has amended the statement of reasons.

does anyone have a copy of decision CSIS/272/09 as i cant seem to find it online.

it would appear that the judge has followed the correct procedure to review so my appeal will need to be based on the fact that the amendment makes no difference to the original error.

if anyone has done this then any advice would be appreciated also.

CA/4297/2004 may also be of interest, but bear in mind that was decided pre Nov 08. In that CD, it was found a Tribunal wasn't at liberty to attempt a retrospective revision of history when issuing a SoR. I'm not sure off the top of my head if the Nov 08 changes negate that CD.

know you said that correct procedure was followed .. but, just in case it might be useful, see also CSIB/331/2009

A tribunal can amend a decision under the so-called "slip rule" if the error is essentially an unintentional slip of the pen (wrong dates, very often) but cannot correct a decision which has a fundamental legal defect in it such as misinterpreting a legal precedent or misreading a piece of documentary evidence.
It is not unknown for the judge to realise when asked for an SOR that they have made an error of law and to say so in the SOR, but that can only be used as grounds for asking for the decision to be set aside. It cannot be used to amend a decision which is wrong. Only the Upper Tribunal has the power to do that.

under the new tribunal rules the lower tribunal can admit that there is an error of law and then amend the statement of reasons.

in my case we lost the appeal, i requested the sor and then requested leave to appeal. The same judge who chaired the appeal has looked at the request agreed there is an error of law but instead of setting the decision aside or granting leave has "reviewed the decision" and amended the statement of reasons.

clearly i will be challenging this but it can unfortunately be done.

as i have been ranting about in the office if this type of thing is allowed to go ahead and decisions are not changed then we may as well not bother requesting statement of reasons and place a picture of a kangaroo above the tribunal service doors as in effect the judges can do what they like.