BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
The Law Commission |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> The Law Commission >> Land, Valuation And Housing Tribunals: The Future (Report) [2003] EWLC 281(2) (15 September 2003) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/other/EWLC/2003/281(2).html Cite as: [2003] EWLC 281(2) |
||
[New search] [Help]
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS
Purpose of this part2.1 Our proposed scheme for the land, valuation and housing tribunals is best viewed as a whole. Therefore instead of placing our recommendations throughout the main body of the text of this report and summarising them at the end, as is usual in Law Commission reports, in this case we have decided to set out our recommendations at the outset. 2.2 The majority of our proposals in this report relate to the structural reform of the existing land, valuation and housing tribunals. We set out our recommendations for structural reform in the first section of this Part. We then set out further recommendations which raise wider issues but which we think should also be taken into consideration. This Part is not intended to provide a detailed picture of our recommendations or the reasoning behind them. We have provided cross references to the full discussion in footnotes to each paragraph.
Recommendations for structural reform2.3 We propose the following structural reforms for the project tribunals.
A reformed structure for land, valuation and housing tribunals2.4 The current land, valuation and housing tribunals should be unified so as to create a generic Property and Valuation Tribunal (PVT) and a reformed Lands Tribunal.[1] 2.5 The PVT should have jurisdiction to adjudicate on disputes now within the jurisdiction of the Residential Property Tribunal Service tribunals, the Valuation Tribunals and the Agricultural Land Tribunals.[2] 2.6 Appeals from the PVT should be heard by the reformed Lands Tribunal.[3] 2.7 Appeals from the PVT to the reformed Lands Tribunal should be subject to a permission requirement.[4] 2.8 Appeals from the PVT to the reformed Lands Tribunal should not be restricted to appeals on points of law. The reformed Lands Tribunal should be able to hear appeals either by way of review or rehearing.[5] 2.9 The reformed Lands Tribunal should have the same range of powers on appeal as the civil courts.[6] 2.10 In addition to its appellate jurisdictions, the reformed Lands Tribunal should have jurisdiction to adjudicate on disputes now within the first instance jurisdiction of the Lands Tribunal and disputes now within the jurisdictions of the Commons Commissioners and the Adjudicator to HM Land Registry.[7] 2.11 Appeals from the reformed Lands Tribunal should be to the Court of Appeal on a point of law only.[8] 2.12 Judicial review of decisions of the PVT should be barred by statute where other remedies have not been exhausted. Judicial review of the reformed Lands Tribunal should be barred by statute.[9] 2.13 Ministerial responsibility for the PVT and the reformed Lands Tribunal should rest with the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs.[10] 2.14 The National Assembly for Wales should consider adopting or joining in a unified tribunal structure.[11]
Operation of the reformed tribunals2.15 The PVT should have a regional structure, which should reflect the regional structure for the unified Tribunals Service.[12] 2.16 The reformed Lands Tribunal should have a President. The PVT should have a President and Regional Chairs.[13] 2.17 The qualification requirements for the President of the reformed Lands Tribunal should be the same as those which now apply in relation to the President of the Lands Tribunal. These qualification requirements should also apply to the President and Regional Chairs of the PVT.[14] 2.18 There should be three different panels of members in the PVT: legal members, professional members and lay members. There should be two different panels of members in the reformed Lands Tribunal: legal members and professional members.[15] 2.19 Each member of the PVT should have a "specialism", based on their existing expertise.[16] 2.20 The reformed Lands Tribunal and the PVT should each have a registrar. The clerks in the Valuation Tribunals should become deputy registrars.[17] 2.21 The reformed Lands Tribunal and the PVT should have a single administrative service.[18] 2.22 A Rules Committee should be established to assist in the making of procedural rules for the reformed Lands Tribunal and the PVT.[19] 2.23 There should be a flexible mechanism for the allocation of members to hear cases, which should take into account the membership panels and individual specialisms.[20] 2.24 There should be a case transfer mechanism to enable the transfer of cases from the PVT to the reformed Lands Tribunal and vice versa where appropriate.[21] 2.25 The procedural rules for the PVT and the reformed Lands Tribunal should provide that alternative dispute resolution is to be encouraged in cases before the tribunals where appropriate.[22] 2.26 If our proposals for a unified PVT and a reformed Lands Tribunal are adopted, there should be a departmental review of the fees currently charged in the project tribunals.[23] 2.27 The Government should consider looking at issues relating to the enforcement powers of tribunals.[24]
Further recommendations2.28 We also make the following recommendations. 2.29 The Government should consider reviewing the way in which the local government tax system is adjudicated, including the roles of the Valuation Tribunals and the magistrates' court.[25] 2.30 Section 6 of the Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1964 should be repealed.[26] 2.31 We repeat our earlier recommendation[27] that the Lands Tribunal should have jurisdiction to determine any claim, whether common law or statutory, relating to damage to land or the use of land, where it arises out of substantially the same facts as a compensation claim which has been referred to the Lands Tribunal.[28] 2.32 The PVT and the reformed Lands Tribunal should have a full range of case management powers to deal with occasional problems associated with jurisdictional overlaps. Case management powers should allow the court to refer matters to the tribunals and vice versa where appropriate.[29]
Note 1 Paragraphs 4.13 – 4.18. [Back] Note 2 Paragraphs 4.26 – 4.31. [Back] Note 4 Paragraphs 4.63 – 4.65. [Back] Note 5 Paragraphs 4.66 – 4.74. [Back] Note 6 Paragraphs 4.75 – 4.76. [Back] Note 7 Paragraphs 4.38 – 4.56. [Back] Note 8 Paragraphs 4.57 – 4.61. [Back] Note 9 Paragraphs 4.77 – 4.80. [Back] Note 10 Paragraphs 4.92 – 4.94. [Back] Note 11 Paragraphs 4.95 – 4.100. [Back] Note 12 Paragraphs 5.2 – 5.4. [Back] Note 13 Paragraphs 5.9 – 5.14. [Back] Note 14 Paragraph 5.14. [Back] Note 15 Paragraphs 5.18 – 5.19. [Back] Note 16 Paragraphs 5.20 – 5.25. [Back] Note 17 Paragraphs 5.30 – 5.33. [Back] Note 18 Paragraphs 5.34 – 5.36. [Back] Note 19 Paragraphs 5.42 – 5.46. [Back] Note 20 Paragraphs 5.47 – 5.54. [Back] Note 21 Paragraphs 5.55 – 5.60. [Back] Note 22 Paragraphs 5.61 – 5.64. [Back] Note 23 Paragraphs 5.65 – 5.68. [Back] Note 24 Paragraphs 5.69 – 5.71. [Back] Note 25 Paragraphs 4.32 – 4.36. [Back] Note 26 Paragraphs 4.81 – 4.91. [Back] Note 27 See Towards a Compulsory Purchase Code: (1) Compensation: A Consultative Report, Consultation Paper No 165, paras 8.30 – 8.32 and Proposal 14. [Back]
