Summary
84. Tribunals are established separately from the courts and from one another for a variety of reasons to carry out greatly differing tasks. To use the architect's phrase, the form should follow the function. A single form cannot, or certainly should not, be imposed. But the forms have multiplied in New Zealand in the individual case without attention always being given to the larger structure. Our purpose in this paper is two fold - first to indicate the criteria by reference to which the form for decision-making should be chosen. Those criteria are set out in paras 24-32 above. They are criteria that attempt to give weight to the rights, interests and issues involved, the qualities, independence and responsibilities of the various decision-makers, and the procedures they follow. The Committee welcomes comment on those criteria.
85. The second purpose of the paper is to make proposals and suggestions for the application of the criteria to the present situation. Accordingly the Committee asks
- whether particular functions should be reallocated to other decision-makers (paras 46-55), and
- whether more general changes should be made in the tribunal system by
- creating an Administrative Division of the District Court (paras 63-64)
- establishing a new general administrative tribunal (paras 65-68)
- grouping together cognate areas into a smaller number of tribunals (possibly as divisions of a general tribunal) (paras 69-83)