Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
‘International’ Tribunals?
So this week a colleagues appeal had something occur which I’ve not come across and left me wondering whether anyone else has experienced this before? My colleagues client’s health conditions are such that they require an appointee (struggle to retain any information and fully understand just how serious their health conditions are). All was running smoothly with client and appointee both expected to participate by telephone until, a couple of days before hand, my colleague finds out that not only will the appointee not be able to sit with the client but the appointee is, in fact, not in the country. Turns out they’d gone for a holiday on a sunny Spanish island in December, when such things were allowed, but the rules changed whilst they were there and are now stuck there. After several frantic phone calls and a few emails the Tribunal decide they will go ahead and call the appointee whilst they are still abroad. At the actual hearing itself sure enough the appointee is brought into the hearing despite not being in the UK. Thankfully they didn’t have to do much anyway as the Tribunal ended up making the decision on the papers so just delivered the news rather than proceeding to a full hearing.
So this was clearly a first for our agency full stop but it got me to idly wondering whether anyone else has participated in a hearing where one of the parties wasn’t present in the UK?
Er, yes, several times over the years.
Appointees in Germany and Australia. Time difference on the latter made it fun.
“Mr. X could you please not interrupt?!”
“I’ll say what I ****** want mate when your decision is obvious and you’ve got me up at ruddy midnight!”
Also had a fascinating Pension Credit one which involved a Czech pension. They struggled with the technical aspects of written English but suggested they could come on video with an interpreter. I totally anticipated the HMCTS attempts at video to fall down as they usually did with the PS but it was the one time it worked beautifully.
Also, bear in mind this happens occasionally on the Wales/England and Scotland/England borders. If Boris gets to build a tunnel there could be even more fun to follow.
One of my client’s was on holiday in Pakistan when the hearing was scheduled and they couldn’t get back, due to restrictions. The DWP contacted them via mobile and the hearing proceeded.
The War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal has conducted international video hearings for many years, as many veterans emigrated to Australia, NZ etc. They started back in the days of Skype (remember that?). The government would not permit the use of Skype on government IT so I believe the Tribunals Service was allowed to use a bespoke system provided by one of the intelligence agencies.
Also, bear in mind this happens occasionally on the Wales/England and Scotland/England borders. If Boris gets to build a tunnel there could be even more fun to follow.
Reminds me of a case I had at UT where it looked like a hearing would be needed. The client and I are in Newcastle but the Judge was sitting in Edinburgh a couple of weeks later and offered to add us to the list. Sure, I said. Came back to the office the next day to find I had been copied into a load of hurried emails from the Office of the Advocate General who had evidently been told that despite the case having nothing to do with Scotland and having been dealt with in Leeds for months, it was now their file and they needed to get to grips with the issues and find Scottish counsel for the hearing. Fortunately (and in no small part due to the excellent work of the folks at DMA Leeds it has to be said), the issues were figured out without a hearing being needed and that jurisdictional nightmare was avoided.
Appointees in Germany and Australia. Time difference on the latter made it fun.
Oh gosh! I was just the one hour time difference, having an Australian level difference would have been painful!
The War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal has conducted international video hearings for many years, as many veterans emigrated to Australia, NZ etc. They started back in the days of Skype (remember that?). The government would not permit the use of Skype on government IT so I believe the Tribunals Service was allowed to use a bespoke system provided by one of the intelligence agencies.
Fascinating, I’ve never had anything to do with that branch of things.
Thanks all for the information, just goes to show there’s very little that’s new under the sun!
I had a telephone hearing last year with a client who was stuck in Spain
He had his mobile with him with a UK sim card in it and he had already given that UK mobile number to HMCTS when the appeal was submitted
The Tribunal went ahead with nobody except me and my client any the wiser as he was on EU roaming
The War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal has conducted international video hearings for many years, as many veterans emigrated to Australia, NZ etc. They started back in the days of Skype (remember that?). The government would not permit the use of Skype on government IT so I believe the Tribunals Service was allowed to use a bespoke system provided by one of the intelligence agencies.
Gosh, I had completely forgotten that side of things. Had a complaint upheld against an SSAT chair who conducted one of the most appalling tribunals I have ever attended. I shall phrase this as delicately as I can. They denied the complaint in full but were exposed by their two wing members stating that it went down exactly as I said.
This includes a certain medical professional telling my clients CPN “Ms x please don’t tell me how to talk to poor people!”. I am loathe to use the word “interrogation” as it’s often an exaggeration but this is the one exception I make. What said chair did to the claimants partner was nothing short of interrogation and reduced them to an episode of the shakes.
Outcome of complaint? Said chair was moved across coincidentally to take charge of what is now the War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation Chamber. My next appeal? Sure enough, him! :(
In case anyone missed it, there has now been guidance issued in relation to this issue
https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/employment/news/item/employment-tribunal-presidents-issue-joint-practice-direction-on-taking-oral-evidence-by-video-or-telephone-from-people-located-abroad
I’ve repped (successfully) at a remote hearing whilst “working from home” in France…..
I’ve repped (successfully) at a remote hearing whilst “working from home” in France…..
The implication from the Agbabiaka case is that in doing so you risked a diplomatic incident…
I think my mere presence in France risked a diplomatic incident.
More seriously, so far as I can make out the implications of Agbabiaka are about the giving of evidence, rather than making legal representations. All of the evidence was given by the appellant, who was located in the UK, so unless I’m missing something, I don’t see an issue…..
I think my mere presence in France risked a diplomatic incident.
More seriously, so far as I can make out the implications of Agbabiaka are about the giving of evidence, rather than making legal representations. All of the evidence was given by the appellant, who was located in the UK, so unless I’m missing something, I don’t see an issue…..
Yes I think you are right, I was just being facetious. Although I understand the UT’s point in principle (that it is bad form for a UK court to exercise its jurisdiction overseas), the idea of a diplomatic incident arising over a benefit appellant picking up the phone to a UK tribunal whilst he happens to be abroad for a week does seem a bit of a stretch.