The 25th Annual Report of the Council on Tribunals– An Opportunity Sadly Missed
| Published date | 01 November 1985 |
| Author | Owen Lomas |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1985.tb00870.x |
| Date | 01 November 1985 |
REPORTS
OF
COMMITTEES
THE
25~~ ANNUAL REPORT
OF
THE
COUNCIL
ON
TRIBUNALS
-
AN
OPPORTUN~ SADLY MISSED
WHATEVER else may be said about the 25th Annual Report of the
Council on Tribunals,’ it does not make very exciting reading.
Indeed, in one early response to it, it was described only a little
unfairly, as
“so
brief
.
.
.
,
dry and bland that it is doubtful if
anyone will ever read it. It signally fails either to inform or
enth~se.”~ That the Report is
so
uninspired and uninspiring is a
pity because its subject matter is of considerable importance. The
Council has jurisdiction over a wide range of tribunals, not to
mention public inquiries, which in turn operate in a large variety
of
areas and deal with a massive volume of cases, many of
which seriously affect the lives of citizens. The Council also
performs an important advisory and consultative role in relation to
many tribunals and similar bodies not under its jurisdiction, and in
the establishment of new tribunals. During the year covered by the
Report for example, the Council played a major role in the
establishment of Dairy Produce Quota Tribunals3; a Data Protection
Appeal Tribunal4 and an Arbitration Tribunal for a Local
Authority’s Tenancy
dispute^,^
and in proposals for the reform of
the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.6 Amongst existing
tribunals for which it is responsible the Council had important
matters to report on Education Appeal Committees7 and Local
Valuation Courts6 and singled out three other tribunals in relation
to serious problems of delay and resulting inju~tice.~
Perhaps one of the most revealing passages of the Report comes
in the first two sections where the Council eagerly invites comment
on any issues covered in the Report,” speaks with obvious
satisfaction about the, albeit small, amount of publicity received on
the 25th anniversary of the Council,” records its efforts to interest
academics and others in research into areas of interest to it and
expresses what reads like a forlorn hope that “some of the many
subjects for research in our field
..
.
(will)
...
be taken up.”” In
198314 H.C. 42.
Legal Action (Journal of the Legal Action Group) January 1985 p.9.
For
a recent
review of the work and performance
of
the Council see Harlow, and Rawlings,
Law and
Adminkfration,
(1984) Chap. 6.
’
Supra
note
1,
paras. 3.5 and 3.8.
Ibid.
paras. 2.17 and 2.13.
Ibid.
para. 2.3.
Ibid.
paras. 2.8 and 2.11.
’
bid.
paras. 3.9 and 3.10.
Ibid.
paras. 3.40 and 3.42.
Discussed below, and see note 36 below.
lo
Ibid.
para. 1.2.
I’
Ibid.
paras. 1.6 and 1.7. The Council refer to a short debate in the House
of
Lords,
press reports including a leading article in
The Times
and an article in Public Law.
Ibid.
para. 1.2(h) and 2.26.
694
To continue reading
Request your trial