No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2009
Tribunals, now recognized as key institutions of the Welfare State, are attracting a good deal of attention. Despite a growing volume of criticism little systematic research has been undertaken into the way they actually function. Since almost every British citizen has rights of appeal to national insurance local tribunals (NILTs) it would seem that they constitute a good starting point. An earlier article presented a general view of NILTs. This paper examines the way the appeal system works from several different perspectives. Difficulties encountered by ordinary citizens at various stages in the appeal process are discussed. The research findings on attendance, representation and success rates are analysed. Attendance by the appellant at the hearing of his appeal is shown to be of particular significance. It is also clear that expansion of facilities for providing advice and representation would be advantageous to appellants. Problems connected with expansion of these facilities are discussed, and an ‘ideal type’ representative is outlined. This leads to a discussion of different tribunal models and a ‘participation model’ is developed. Finally, some implications of the research findings for the development of social policy are considered.
1 Report of the Committee on Administrative Tribunals and Inquiries, London: HMSO, Cmd. 218, 1957, p. 8 (Franks Committee).Google Scholar
2 Bell, Kathleen et al. ‘National Insurance Local Tribunals: A Research Study, Part I’, Journal of Social Policy, Vol. 3, Part 4, pp. 289–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 See Bell, Kathleen et al. , op. cit.Google Scholar, for details of methodology. All chairmen (71) and a one in two sample of panel members (718) of all NILTs in Scotland and the Northern Region of England were included in a postal survey. Every appellant (272) receiving a decision at eight NILTs in and around Tyneside from mid-May to the end of July, 1972, was included in the appellants' survey. Response rates were: chairmen 84.5 per cent; members 67.3 per cent; appellants 89.7 per cent.
4 Members of the research team attended 68 complete tribunal sittings and observed 350 appeals.
5 This form is now being revised. The original wording was: ‘Do you wish to be present qr be represented at the hearing of your case? – (Yes or No)’.
6 See Bell, Kathleen et al. , op. cit.Google Scholar, for information on the data analysis. Data were extracted, analysed and collated from sets of official papers relating to all final hearings of appeals to NILTs in Scotland and the Northern Region of England in 1970. Altogether 7,528 appeals were included in this analysis. In this paper, for reasons of brevity, statistics quoted from the data analysis refer to Scotland only.
7 A claimant of unemployment benefit may be disallowed benefit for up to six weeks on the ground that he lost his employment through his misconduct. Not surprisingly, appeals in these cases tend to generate a certain amount of heat. We found that most appellants did not understand the technical sense in which this term is used and felt there was a moral stigma attached to it.
8 Franks Committee, op. cit., p. 20.Google Scholar
9 Ibid., p. 17 and p. 21.
10 Society of Labour Lawyers, Justice for All, Fabian Research Series 273, London 1968.Google Scholar
11 Society of Conservative Lawyers, Rough Justice, Conservative Political Centre, London 1968, p. 13.Google Scholar
12 Brooke, Rosalind et al. , A Policy to Establish the Legal Rights of Low Income Families, Child Poverty Action Group Pamphlet No. 1, London 1969, p. 11.Google Scholar
13 The Lord Chancellor's Legal Aid Advisory Committee, 17th Report, London: HMSO, Cmnd. 373, 1968.Google Scholar
14 A substantial number of tribunal chairmen disagree with this point of view. They fear that if legal representation before tribunals becomes the norm proceedings will become more formal, slow and impersonal. See SirConroy, Diarmaid, President of the Industrial Tribunals, Do Applicants Need Advice or Representation? in Edited Transcript of the Proceedings of a Conference on The Future of Administrative Tribunals, April 1971, University of Birmingham, Institute of Judicial Administration.Google Scholar
15 Legal Aid and Advice Act 1949, S.1(6). The test for a grant of legal aid is that the applicant has reasonable grounds for taking or defending proceedings and that it is not unreasonable that he should receive legal aid in the particular circumstances of the case.
16 Legal Action Group, Representation before Tribunals: memorandum to the Lord Chancellor's Legal Aid Advisory Committee, 1974.Google Scholar See LAG Bulletin, 02 1974.Google Scholar
17 See Abel-Smith, Brian et al. , Legal Problems and the Citizen, London: Heinemann, 1973Google Scholar: also Morris, Pauline et al. , Social Need and Legal Action, London: Martin Robertson, 1973.Google Scholar
18 The original legal advice scheme was embodied in the Legal Aid and Advice Act 1949, but that part of the Act was not implemented until 1957. People within prescribed income limits could obtain legal advice on payment of a small sum for up to one and a half hours.
19 See The Law Society, Second Memorandum on Legal Advice and Assistance, London: The Law Society, 1969.Google Scholar
20 See Bell, Kathleen et al. , op. cit., pp. 300–1.Google Scholar
21 For a general discussion of trade union legal services see Latta, Geoff and Lewis, Roy, ‘Trade Union Legal Services’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. XII, No. 1. 1974, pp. 56–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22 See Bell, Kathleen et al. , op. cit., pp. 312–13Google Scholar for analysis of social class distribution.
23 See Bell, Kathleen et al. , op. cit., pp. 306–10.Google Scholar
24 Bell, Kathleen, Disequilibrium in Welfare, Inaugural Lecture, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1973, p. 16.Google Scholar
25 Fulbrook, Julian, Brooke, Rosalind and Archer, Peter, Tribunals: A Social Court?, Fabian Tract 417, 1973, p. 13.Google Scholar
26 The survey of members revealed that 61 per cent had sat no more than twice in the previous twelve months. Infrequent sittings would not be helpful to members in developing their knowledge, confidence and commitment to the work. As a result of our findings on frequency of sitting D.H.S.S. has already taken action to improve the situation. With regard to training, the position at present is that a number of conferences for chairmen have been held and more are being planned; but there is no parallel development of training facilities for members. Our surveys revealed strong support for training amongst both chairmen and members.
27 Pinker, Robert, Social Theory and Social Policy, London: Heinemann, 1971, p. 141.Google Scholar
28 Bell, Kathleen, op. cit., p. 20.Google Scholar