2012/3/29 Julian Todd <[email protected]>: > The truth is the just make it up as they go along -- which is, I am > told, to be expected for such a newly invented tribunal.
This is exactly right. I worked implementing a new set of tribunal procedures and now (10 years later) I'm sitting as a judge on the same tribunal and this is what has been happening. Typically the rules for a new tribunal - which are usually drafted by civil servants at some remove from those working in the tribunal - will contain a lot of "blanks". We have to ask "what are we supposed to do"? And then do the best we can and wait for appeal courts to overturn what we are doing if its wrong. If the appeal is under s57 (i.e. against an enforcement notice), the procedural rules: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/14/article/7/made appears to give the tribunal a discretion over whether to join a party. Under 7(2) the tribunal decides whether it would be "desireable". In your case I can't see how it would be reasonable to refuse. You appear to fit the situation in 7(3) as "any person who receives a copy of a notice of appeal or reply naming him as a person having an interest in the proceedings, or who otherwise claims an interest in the proceedings". This means you *may* give a "joinder notice". Clearly if you were to write to the tribunal without a joinder notice, they could still join you - since 7(2) lets them do that - but it would be better, I think, to use one. 7(6) tells you what must go in the joinder notice. 7(7) and 7(8) suggest that this notice had better (amongst other things) contain what we would call your "pleadings". In other words a reasoned argument as to why you think the appeal should fail. Good luck. -- Francis Davey _______________________________________________ developers-public mailing list [email protected] https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public Unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com
