Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
devastated! ... and confused!
What did you do to them?
Isn’t there a practice direction for dealing with vulnerable and child witnesses?
I’ve had similar at the same venue; I actually asked one Judge “do you know who I am?” before explaining who my clients were to assuage my temerity.
I’ve had a couple of cases where they’ve mooted dealing with cases at Birmingham CJC to take advantage of the additonal security there; one actually got that far. Ended up the first case I’ve seen a Tribunal use the panic button then leg it out of the room.
now that I would have liked to have seen .... I will have a look for the direction Dan, as I definitely thought I had read something about this (maybe some caselaw even) I shall be on a mission so am trying to prepare everything ready for when I get the SOR
I think the following has in the annex the Tribunal Practice direction Dan mentioned (may have been updated), but the whole doc may be of interest ‘developed for the First Tier Immigration and Asylum Chamber following
the Guidance issued by the Senior President of Tribunals regarding
Child, Vulnerable Adult and Sensitive Witnesses1
. Although specific to these groups it is also a reminder of good judgecraft’.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ChildWitnessGuidance.pdf
brilliant Andy - thank you. that’s my job for tomorrow
and here’s the other guidance issued for the tribunal service generally
Just for completeness have added the wotsit below because the above makes references to it.
https://www.judiciary.uk/publications/new-edition-of-the-equal-treatment-bench-book-launched/
im so grateful to you all for the support and for the very useful information, lots of bedtime reading 😊
soooo .... I have to reinstate this thread concerning this horrible case as im seeking further advice/confirmation if I may please. After a year, we finally have the decision set aside! it took 7 months (and a complaint to HMCTS) to get the statement of reasons. When we finally received it, there were more holes than in a fishing net, and it seems that the Judge agrees as he has just set the decision aside without the need to go to UT. We are therefore back to where we were (for now, anyway as the decision is now due for review again!)
To recap:
clt transferred from DLA to PIP and was awarded SR DL and SR Mob appointee not happy and went to appeal;
FTT awarded EDL and SR Mob - appointee not happy (with mob) and went to UT - decision set aside (so puts us back to SR DL and SR mob?)
2nd appeal was the horror detailed above and clt awarded SR DL and no Mob! - decision now set aside. (so again, puts us back to SR DL and SR Mob?)
appointee does not want to attend another appeal (understandably); the issues around her son attending (even if we could in current times) have not diminished and she will still struggle to get him to a hearing (though it is possible of course that this will be a telephone hearing as things stand; and the written evidence is very strong).
My question is, if she now withdraws the appeal, am I correct in thinking that the award that she had in the first place ie SR DL and SR Mob would be paid? I have no doubt that client qualifies for a higher level of award but understand appointees concerns. Obviously, it has to be her decision (and I think she should go back to appeal) but just want to be certain of the consequences, should she decide to withdraw.
thank you for your support.
The DWP decision stands until it is set aside by a tribunal on appeal.
The two Tribunal decisions have been themselves set aside so it is as though they never happened.
If your client withdraws their appeal, the DWP decision (i.e. SR/SR) will continue to operate.
There is an absolute right to withdraw the appeal unless a specific direction requires the tribunal to consent to the appeal being withdrawn.
Thank you Elliot - just wanted to confirm this so will now see how she wants to proceed.
A quick update - this lady did not withdraw the appeal for her son. The appeal went ahead, and finally, after all this time, and stress, we were vindicated and an award was made of EDL and E mob. Hopefully, all will go well from now on.
Hurray, got there in the end.
I do find it odd that we are told that consistency is one of the reasons for introducing PIP assessments but this gentleman’s case has been assessed by four different decision makers with four different outcomes (SR/SR, ER/SR, SR/- and ER/ER).
A quick update - this lady did not withdraw the appeal for her son. The appeal went ahead, and finally, after all this time, and stress, we were vindicated and an award was made of EDL and E mob. Hopefully, all will go well from now on.
Great result .... and thanks too for sharing about how it worked out 😊
Hurray, got there in the end.
I do find it odd that we are told that consistency is one of the reasons for introducing PIP assessments but this gentleman’s case has been assessed by four different decision makers with four different outcomes (SR/SR, ER/SR, SR/- and ER/ER).
I know what you mean but I don’t find it odd at all. Consistency absolutely was not one of the reasons DLA was replaced by PIP. I do look back at this thread and can’t help but suspect this would have been resolved a lot sooner had there been no debate about the appellant attending.
Amazing stuff amazing feats Dizzy!