Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
Tribunal Judge tells rep to “SHUT UP”
Thanks for the links to the training material. It’s very useful but I am finding some of the advice hard to reconcile. Judge Street says ‘give us the facts’ but also says don’t make assertions without pointing to evidence. But an ATOS report isn’t likely to contain much other than some vague counter-assertions (focusing on the client’s best days), and the client’s own evidence isn’t available yet to point to. There is also a warning about not devaluing the client’s evidence by giving it for them.
Likewise, Judge Boyd says ‘please don’t put factual assertions in your submission’, but in his example he includes ‘Although he can stand in the shower without crutches he is unsteady and it rarely takes him more than a few minutes to shower.’ Maybe there’s a reason that’s a proper submission and not a factual assertion, but these seem to me rather pedantic distinctions between types of wording that the higher courts would worry about, whereas I am generally trying to keep to the objective of ‘avoiding unnecessary formality and seeking flexibility in the proceedings’.
I agree with Chris Connelly.
I have just, this afternoon, walked out of a hearing after the Judge attempted (and possibly succeeded) to completely discredit me in front of my client.
I was 4 minutes late (due to heavy traffic) for an ESA appeal which started at 2pm. The Judge went through her introductions then turned to me with her specs halfway down her nose and said “Now Ms Hunter would you like to explain to the Tribunal why you were late”. I was so taken aback by her tone and attitude that I temporarily lost the ability to speak and garbled some response which sounded very feeble and pathetic.
She continued by lecturing me on my duty’ to the Tribunal and to my client to arrive on time and asked me to apologise.
I was made to feel like a child in front of the headmistress. All the while, I was thinking “Would she have dressed down a Presenting Officer or an Interpreter in this manner?”, to which I think the answer would have been ‘no’.
I decided that, being a 53 yr old woman with over 10 years experience as a representative, I was not going to be bullied or spoken to with such disrepect and told her so. I then said that I didnt think I would continue with the appeal, got up and walked out, informing her that I would be making a complaint.
All this was acted out embarrassingly in front of the doctor, my client and the clerk. My client had specifically asked me to attend due to his problems with social phobia and it was for this reason mainly that I had agreed to go with him. A very unfortunate start to his appeal which, fortunately, he won.
In 10 years, I have never been spoken to with such contemptuous disrespect for the heinous crime of arriving 4 minutes late. In my experience, Tribunal judges are, usually, fair, courteous and grateful for our attendance at a hearing to ‘assist’ if required. They do not have the right to be rude, disrespectful or bullying to an appellant or a representative and I am a great believer that such highly unprofessional behaviour should be challenged at all times. So get complaining!
Thanks for the links to the training material. It’s very useful but I am finding some of the advice hard to reconcile. Judge Street says ‘give us the facts’ but also says don’t make assertions without pointing to evidence. But an ATOS report isn’t likely to contain much other than some vague counter-assertions (focusing on the client’s best days), and the client’s own evidence isn’t available yet to point to. There is also a warning about not devaluing the client’s evidence by giving it for them.
Likewise, Judge Boyd says ‘please don’t put factual assertions in your submission’, but in his example he includes ‘Although he can stand in the shower without crutches he is unsteady and it rarely takes him more than a few minutes to shower.’ Maybe there’s a reason that’s a proper submission and not a factual assertion, but these seem to me rather pedantic distinctions between types of wording that the higher courts would worry about, whereas I am generally trying to keep to the objective of ‘avoiding unnecessary formality and seeking flexibility in the proceedings’.
Yes, I noticed that too. I must say I almost invariably include a brief summary of the client’s medical conditions and relevant symptoms in my WCA subs along with (again brief) examples of the real life day to day difficulties the client experiences in relation to the descriptors we have identified (very much as in Judge Boyd’s example). I also flag up any relevant contradictions, misunderstandings or errors in the ESA85 and respond to the more fatuous of the DM’s remarks if it feels appropriate. It was just after reading Judge Boyd’s piece I began to doubt myself (and wonder if panels have been laughing their socks off at me for years, or using my subs as ‘how not to do it’ examples for training sessions..)
I think I shall stick to what I’ve been doing for the past 20 years. Seems to get a result more often than not so I must be doing something right I suppose.
Oh, and this from the Boyd one:
Incidentally, do you know what the ‘Work Related Activity’ for people in the Support
Group consists of? I am told that it is about five interviews per year.
Sounds like an ‘evidence free zone’ to me.
Hello,
I’m no sure that this is entirely relevant but some years ago I raised what I thought were pretty convincing points of law in an appeal. One of the two lay members met each one of my points with a wave of his hand in a dismissing action. At the third point I looked at the chairperson and asked if the member was listening as he seemed not to be understanding me. At this a somewhat irate chairperson threw this comment at me:
“I am aware that this is a civil hearing Mr. Hill, but you are nonetheless subject to the rules on contempt of court so just be careful.”
When I tried to placate her by saying that I had no contempt for the hearing and I was just confused at the lay member’s actions, the Chairperson then added:
“I’ve already told you, now just be careful about what you say next Mr. Hill.”
I’m not sure whether reps are subject to the rules on contempt of court but I felt it best not to test it so I thought it prudent to speak no more.
Incidentally, the case was eventually successful at the Commissioners.
Thank you.
Patrick
I think I know who your judge was! How did your complaint go Lawtcrav?
Still waiting
[ Edited: 13 Nov 2013 at 09:02 pm by Lawtcrav ]As a full time rep with Durham Welfare Rights I would say that we take a slightly different approach to the problem of being told to ‘shut up.’
It happens on probably a weekly basis - and I was even once asked to leave the tribunal room for arguing my point and not shutting up.
Treat it as a badge - it means you have ‘arrived’ because the Judge will as sure as eggs hatch little chickens lose more sleep over it than you ever will.
Duncan
“Treat it as a badge - it means you have ‘arrived’ because the Judge will as sure as eggs hatch little chickens lose more sleep over it than you ever will.”
Is this really true?
Hello,
I’m no sure that this is entirely relevant but some years ago I raised what I thought were pretty convincing points of law in an appeal. One of the two lay members met each one of my points with a wave of his hand in a dismissing action. At the third point I looked at the chairperson and asked if the member was listening as he seemed not to be understanding me. At this a somewhat irate chairperson threw this comment at me:
“I am aware that this is a civil hearing Mr. Hill, but you are nonetheless subject to the rules on contempt of court so just be careful.”
When I tried to placate her by saying that I had no contempt for the hearing and I was just confused at the lay member’s actions, the Chairperson then added:
“I’ve already told you, now just be careful about what you say next Mr. Hill.”
I’m not sure whether reps are subject to the rules on contempt of court but I felt it best not to test it so I thought it prudent to speak no more.
Incidentally, the case was eventually successful at the Commissioners.
Thank you.
Patrick
I fear that she might have overreached herself. There is no parallel in Social Security Appeal Tribunals with contempt of court rulings in the traditional sense. As you know judges in the courts have considerable powers to hold any person in contempt for their behaviour in the court room. In SSAT’s the equivalence of contempt of court only relates to powers to compel people to give evidence, swear an oath, furnish documents and inspect documents or other things including premises (see rule 7(3) of the Tribunal Rules). The tribunal judge already has powers to control the proceedings, including the power to exclude anyone if he thinks they are disrupting the proceedings. There is no need for more formal sanctions. However, any decision to exclude is subject to the overriding objectives that are laid out in rule 2 and thus should only be used as a last resort.
“Treat it as a badge - it means you have ‘arrived’ because the Judge will as sure as eggs hatch little chickens lose more sleep over it than you ever will.”
Is this really true?
Before proudly becoming a WRO I was a criminal defence solicitor and many of the judges I deal with were friends and colleagues on a previous existence [some still are but that’s another story] and yes, they do agonise about making mistakes and getting it wrong both in the legal and social sense.
Generally though lawyers have few social skills :)