Appeals: Written Submissions

I’m not sure that it would be beyond as a training aid for advisers who are just starting out doing appeal work as I think everyone develops their own style when it comes to submissions. Certainly my style is different to my colleague who also currently does submissions. And both of our styles are different to other colleagues who have previously worked here and done appeal work. There is also issues around confidentiality to consider as well perhaps less so when arguing technical legal points but certainly for disability benefits where you will be directly dressing a clients function. If you strip out of the identifying stuff from that sort of submission would there be much left of use? Must admit I’m not big on the caselaw and usually don’t cite any unless there’s a very specific point I want to address or it’s relevant on a technical point (i.e. around the valuation of capital there’s a couple of good cases). But perhaps that’s one of the stylistic points where people differ in their approach!

So perhaps it would be useful to have a pool of submissions which could be used as training aids (to help answer the age old “how do you write a submission?!”) but I’m not sure beyond that?

I don’t wish to be rude but I’d definitely not be interested. Whether you do a sub and the style of sub you do is very much based on experience and knowledge and not least experience and knowledge of how such things are interpreted local to you.

In the North West for example HMCTS salaried judges put great value on written subs but the reality is that most members have neither read nor understood them. The same people turn up at TUGs praising reps who do subs to high heaven when we know very well that they’re actually the very worst at noting and digesting such things.

I would also set little store by success rates. My remit, as I see it, is to advise hopeless cases as to why there’s no point in proceeding. What’s left are winnable cases and I am but one of many variables which lead to winnable becoming won. The proportion of winnable cases I have at any given time is nothing I have control of. The proportion which turn into won is a tangible. The proportion which turn into won specifically because of a written sub is not. 

I posted in the thread https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/15592/

The Judge in that case specifically referred to my submission in the decision notice so that particular result has at tangible answer here , i.e. the submission did make a difference, although I will concede that I have many other cases where it may well be that we could have won even if I had done nothing

I have attached an anonymous version of the submission used there

This might add to the debate

I don’t think I would live to tell the tale if I sent in a 19 page submission round these parts.

When we have TUG meetings up this way Judges appreciate having a submission, and during hearings i’ve seen the Judge with my submission often marked with a highlighter. We try to keep it to a maximum of 2 pages as the majority of the evidence should come from the client. Identifying relevant descriptors with your client can cut down on the time my client is cross examined markedly. Horses for courses i guess.