ICE are beginning to feel the strain.....

CMAC_2

Lord Judge, the Lord Chief Justice, made a Direction on 29 October 2008 with effect from 3 November 2008 transferring two classes of action for judicial review from the High Court to the Upper Tribunal.
The two classes are:

• Appeals against decisions on review under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
• Reviews of decisions of the First-tier Tribunal made under the new Tribunal Procedure Rules for the Tribunal where there is no right of appeal to the Upper Tribunal against the decisions.

At the same time the President of the Queens Bench Division, Sir Anthony May, issued guidance to High Court Judges about judicial review in the Upper Tribunal. The guidance emphasises that under the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 all judicial review cases of either of the above classes must be heard in the Upper Tribunal. If a case of that kind is started in the High Court, it should be transferred to the Upper Tribunal.
The guidance also reminds judges of a more general power to transfer other judicial review cases to the Upper Tribunal if certain conditions are met. The main conditions are that the case does not seek to call into question anything done in a Crown Court and that when hearing the case the Upper Tribunal will be headed by either a High Court Judge or another judge specifically nominated to hear these cases. The conditions are set out fully in section 18 of the 2007 Act.
When deciding judicial review cases in England and Wales, the Upper Tribunal judges are required to apply the same principles of law that the High Court would apply to those cases. Other rules apply in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
In practice, judicial review cases in the Upper Tribunal will be heard either by the Senior President or a High Court Judge, perhaps sitting with one or more Judges of the Upper Tribunal.
In all cases, you must have permission from either the High Court or the Upper Tribunal to bring the action for judicial review. And you must show that you have a sufficient personal interest in the matter that you seek to challenge. You must also make any application without undue delay. The powers of the Upper Tribunal when hearing these cases include powers to make orders requiring or prohibiting action by public bodies, declarations, injunctions and in some cases damages. The Upper Tribunal does not have the powers of the High Court to hear challenges against Acts of Parliament under the Human Rights legislation.
If the Upper Tribunal does not have power to decide a particular judicial review case, it will refer it to the High Court for decision.

frugallass

CMAC wrote: »

ICE can only look at a case but dont have any power other than make a recommendation, but even then the csa dont need to take any notice of it. Appeal is the best way if you have a real issue with your case. If its a handling issue you dont really have much hope other then actual finacial loss route via the new judicial review route

I don't really have anything to 'appeal' against - although part of my complaint does deal with a member of staff who made a mistake on my file, corrected it a few weeks later but because the correction was in my favour it meant I couldn't appeal against the maintenance calculation decision.

All I want is for CSA to hold their hands up and say 'sorry, we really stuffed up big time' and I want to be reimbursed for the time and expenses incurred whilst trying to sort the whole sorry mess out. They shoved £40 into my bank account for the 'delays experienced' but some time has passed since then and it's still not rectified.

Sensemaya

CMAC

Thanks for that.

Would you be kind enough to add this info into the sticky?

"section 18 of the 2007 Act".

Have to google this later on.

catenorfolk

frugallass wrote: »

I didn't think a Tribunal was an option available to me - how would a Tribunal help my complaint?

I haven't got the finances to fund a solicitor - I don't see how a solicitor would help me either to be honest.

A Tribunal is an independant judge, nothing to do with the CSA, They identify the problem with information from both parties and then make a decision as to whether to CSA are at fault or not. I have been dealing with tribunal service for over two years. they are good.

frugallass

thanks for all your comments / advice folks