The place of public statutory tribunals in the English legal system

Abstract

A survey of tribunals in terms of history emphasises their unsystematic development. Two individual tribunals, the Traffic Commissioners and the Industrial Tribunals are taken as examples of this. The relationship between tribunals and the Executive, which is normally responsible for setting them up, continues to be uncertain and ambiguous. Despite the conclusion in the Franks Report that tribunals have an adjudicatory function, there is a lack of any recognised link between tribunals and the courts. This has led to increasing use of remedies ill-adapted to the purpose in order to challenge tribunal decisions in the courts. The emergence of a body of judicial opinion favouring appeal, at least on a point of law, has resulted in the blurring of legal principles. The rules of procedure for tribunals are unnecessarily varied and contain unjustifiable variations. The present selection of members is unsatisfactory and Improvements are necessary in the provision of accommodation and administrative staff. The Council on Tribunals has not the resources for adequate supervision and has no power to remodel the system. The conclusion is that Parliament should find time for a comprehensive review. The advantages of tribunals are obscured by the difficulties outlined above. Legislation should be enacted to provide for systematic development in the future.