Help please: Where to find Tribunals, Court and Enforcement Act 2007 - SECTION 11(1)

'''Right to appeal to Upper Tribunal 11.—(1) For the purposes of subsection (2), the reference to a right of appeal is to a right to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on any point of law arising from a decision
made by the First-tier Tribunal other than an excluded decision.
(2) Any party to a case has a right of appeal, subject to subsection (8).
(3) That right may be exercised only with permission (or, in Northern Ireland, leave).
(4) Permission (or leave) may be given by–
(a) the First-tier Tribunal, or
(b) the Upper Tribunal,
on an application by the party. '''

page 10 of the pdf at this link https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/15/pdfs/ukpga_20070015_301114_en.pdf

Bear in mind that any appeal to the UT to set the FTT's decision aside has to be on an error of law made by the FTT.
I assume you have the FTT's SoR (this is the first step).

The FTT's statement of reasons must show that it:
applied the law correctly
made correct factual findings
gave adequate reasons for its decision
made the decision in the correct way
obeyed the rules of natural justice

A failure to do any of these can constitute an error of law.

Errors of law in FTT decisions, including the following:
I. applying the wrong law – for example where the FTT used the wrong legislation, misunderstood the legislation or overlooked relevant case law.
II. making incorrect factual findings – To make a decision the FTT must decide what the facts are and not take into account irrelevant facts.
III. giving inadequate reasons – The FTT must explain its decision: it must explain how the evidence established the facts and why the facts made it apply the law in the way it did.
IV. making a decision that is not supported by the evidence – for example where the FTT ignored or overlooked evidence, misinterpreted evidence, took into account irrelevant evidence or made a decision that does follow logically from the evidence.
V. making a decision that is ‘perverse’ – where the FTT acted irrationally and in a way that no reasonable FTT, given the relevant law and the evidence before it and the findings of fact, could have come to the decision that it did.
VI. breach of ‘the rules natural justice – This includes failing to follow FTT procedure, for example failing to give parties 14 days’ notice of an oral appeal hearing or failing to inform parties that it intends to take into account a matter not addressed in the appeal papers or during the hearing. It also includes failure to follow the procedural rules for all judicial process, for example bias or not allowing a party to speak.

Finding grounds for an appeal
Some appeals to FTTs are made solely because the claimant disagrees with the DWP’s interpretation of the law and the FTT decides whose interpretation it prefers. In these appeals identifying the potential error of law can be relatively straightforward – the legal argument that failed before the FTT is restated to the UT, but now also addresses any alternative interpretation that arose during the course of the appeal.
Most appeals however are not primarily about bare legal interpretation. In these cases, identifying potential errors of law involves a careful study of the law, the evidence (including oral evidence from the hearing), the FTT statement of reasons and how the hearing was conducted.

The FTT statement of reasons must adequately explain how it reached its decision. An oft-quoted Commissioners’ decision states that:
“the minimum requirement must at least be that the claimant looking at the decision should be able to discern on the face of it why the evidence has failed to satisfy the authority.” (R(A)1/72).
Potentially, anything less is an error of law.

An ideal FTT statement of reasons will:
state the legislation that applies to the question under appeal and establish whether case law helps its interpretation. If case law is contradictory, the FTT will explain why it chose to follow a particular case – for instance it may fit the facts of this appeal more closely;
state the relevant facts of the case. It will say what evidence it used to establish the facts;
include a discussion of the evidence. If evidence is contradictory it will explain why it thought one set of evidence more credible than another;
explain why applying the law to the facts it found produced the outcome stated in the decision.
Compare the FTT’s reasons with the case papers, its record of proceedings and your own notes or memory of what happened in the FTT. Do the reasons adequately explain how the FTT came to its decision? If not, what is missing? Try to express anything that is missing in terms of grounds I to VI above – if you can do so, you may have established an error of law that is grounds for an appeal.