The term ‘tribunal’ defines a legal body which adjudicates on disputes in specialised areas of law.
Tribunals in the administrative justice system
There are over 70 types of tribunal but the majority rule on disputes between an individual, or a private organisation and a state agency.
Some tribunals that may be of particular interest to journalists include:
The Immigration and Asylum Chamber hears appeals against the Home Secretary on these issues
The Special Immigration Appeals Commission hears appeals against the Home Office to deport or exclude someone from the UK on national security grounds
The Social Entitlement Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal hears appeals from disputes about social security and child support payments, criminal injuries compensation and asylum support
The Health, Education and Social Care Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal hears appeals from people who have been banned from working for organisations concerned with children and vulnerable adults. This tribunal can also include doctors and dentists appealing against their exclusion from a list which allows them to provide work in NHS primary care
Disciplinary tribunals are usually sat in public unless they decide to exclude them from all parts of the hearing. Tribunals can issue a specific order to be held in private for example when confidential information is presented, if the tribunal feels that a prohibition would be necessary to avoid ‘exceptional prejudice’. McNae’s gives the examples of The General Medical Council, The Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal and The Bar Standards Board’s Disciplinary Tribunal.
All tribunals are regulated by statute meaning that, as stated in the Defamation Act 1996, fair and accurate published reports of the public proceedings are protected by qualified privilege if the requirements of libel defence are met.
Proceedings of many tribunals are not as formal as those in a court of law; an appellant might not be represented by a lawyer. Journalists should remember that qualified privilege does not extend to any published material which is not in the public interest.
Some tribunals are classed as courts therefore media reports are protected by absolute privilege. A tribunal is defined as a court if it wields ‘the judicial power of the state’ but there is no comprehensive case law on which tribunals can be regarded as having this power. The Contempt of Court Act applies to the media coverage in this circumstance. However it is unlikely that reports would cause substantial risk of prejudice as judges/professionals are unlikely to be influenced. Although, there is always the possibility that a witness could be affected and any contact with a witness prior to these hearings could be contempt in common law.
Employment tribunals try cases of unfair dismissal and complaints of discrimination. Each employment tribunal usually has three members: a lawyer who is chair (officially the ‘employment judge’) and two lay members. From April 2012, the government announced there would be less oral evidence with witness statements ‘taken as read’.
A judge alone will preside in unfair dismissal claims. Journalists are provided with the details of the parties in a case and the nature of the claim once it is listed for hearing. In judgements, tribunals first decide on liability then to follow, often after an adjournment, there is a remedy.
The Employment Tribunals Act can be sat in private in the interests of national security or when a witness’ evidence is likely to contain information that would break statutory law/an obligation of confidence or information which would cause substantial injury to the appellant’s or employer’s interests.
There are restricted reporting orders on specific tribunals, especially in the case of sexual misconduct. Employment tribunals can exercise discretionary power to make temporary anonymity orders, to prohibit the identification on the person making an allegation and anyone affected by it. This is done to safeguard one’s reputation but an order cannot bestow such anonymity on an employer that is a company or institution unless that organisation is a small firm where identification is likely.
In 1997, the Court of Appeal declared it important that tribunals recognise that the power of anonymity was not to be exercised automatically but that the public interest clause was to be considered. A tribunal chair can decide whether the order should continue in force as a full order during the first hearing.
Any person can apply to make representations about an interim restricted reporting order.
It is noteworthy that a tribunal can revoke the order at any stage to permit the media to immediately identify someone and as soon as the tribunal’s written judgement is promulgated the order is automatically not in force.
Publishing matter that breaches a restricted reporting order is a summary offence punishable by a maximum fine of £5000. It is a defence to show that the publisher was not aware and neither suspected or had reason to that the material breached the order.
Under the Sexual Offences Act 1992, alleged victims were granted automatic anonymity unless the person gives valid, written consent to be identified. Restricted reporting orders also apply to disability cases, in the circumstance where publication is likely to cause significant embarrassment.
Contempt and defamation law affecting coverage of employment tribunals take upon the same restrictions as courts due to their classification.
– Contempt of Court Act
– Ban on unauthorised use of audio recording devices
– Protected by either absolute or qualified privilege
The Inquiries Act 2005 empowers either a Minister or the chair of the relevant public inquiry to impose reporting restrictions.
Privilege will not apply to media reports in a private session of an inquiry, the findings are usually published by a government department, by Parliament or by the local authority.
A media report of a public inquiry published by officials anywhere in the world is protected by qualified privilege and there is no requirement for an explanation to be published. However a media report of this kind published by a UK local authority is protected by qualified privilege but is subject to publishing an explanation of contradiction.
megrosefisher 