Conclusions and Recommendations
1. Administrative tribunals have an essential role in our system of administration and justice. They have important functions related to, but distinct from, those of the executive branch of government and of the courts.
2. Public powers of decision should be allocated in a way which recognises the responsibilities, qualifications and procedures of those who decide and the characteristics of the matter to be decided. Form should match function.
Criteria for allocation of decision-making powers
3. The Government should endorse the criteria for the allocation of decision-making powers between the executive, the courts and tribunals set out in the Report (paras 39-55). These criteria relate to
(1) the characteristics of the powers, the issues to be resolved and the interests affected,
(2) the qualities and responsibilities of the decision makers, and
(3) the procedures they follow.
4. The Government and Parliament should apply these criteria when proposing or reviewing statutes conferring public powers.
5. In many situations the above criteria may be met by (1) officials (often acting in a summary administrative way) making the first decision and (2) an independent tribunal, following the principles of natural justice, determining appeals from the first decision. (Para 55)
Appeals from tribunals
6. (a) Parties to proceedings before an administrative tribunal with an original power of decision should have one right of appeal against final decisions of the tribunal.
(b) If the appeal is to a court, Parliament should adopt a more consistent and principled approach to the choice between the District Courts, the High Court and the Administrative Division of the High Court, and to the use of expert members and assessors.
(c) Whether an appeal to the courts is general or limited should depend on an assessment of the matters discussed in paras 39-55, the relative expertise of the original and appellate bodies, the procedure that each follows, and the nature of the issues which arise for determination.
(d) There should in general be provision for appeal to the final appeal court, but only with leave and on the basis that the case presents questions of law of public importance. (Paras 56-70)
General change in tribunal structure
7. There should be a rationalisation of the system of administrative tribunals, with the members and functions being brought together in a smaller number of larger bodies, with advantages for the build up of expertise in administrative adjudication and in the grouped areas of activity, as well as for greater efficiency and economy in the administration of the tribunals. (Paras 98-118)
8. The major tribunals would be concerned with
- social welfare and other benefits - a welfare tribunal (paras 122-127)
- planning, environmental and scientific matters - a resources tribunal (paras 128-132)
- taxation and customs - a revenue tribunal (paras 133-134).
Other functions might be similarly grouped (for instance in a licensing body (paras 135-140) or an indecent publications body (para 99)).
Specific changes
9. In the review of the Copyright Act 1962 consideration should be given to the need for continuing the Copyright Tribunal (para 92).
10. Appeals from the Director-General of Health under the Clean Air Act 1972 should be dealt with along with other environmental and planning appeals (para 93; see also paras 128-132).
11. Assuming that the powers of decision of the Minister of Agriculture under the Meat Act 1981 in respect of meat packing houses and slaughterhouses remain, consideration should be given to conferring the appellate function on District Courts (para 94).
12. Consideration should be given to the transfer of the licensing function under the Private Investigators and Security Guards Act 1974 to the District Courts (para 135).
13. Assuming that the powers of the Shop Trading Hours Commission under the Shop Trading Hours Act 1977 continue, consideration should be given to transferring them to local authorities with a right of appeal to the resources tribunal (para 136).