[2024] UKUT 410 (AAC)

The FTT has discretion both in relation to whether to (i) adjourn the hearing at the appellant’s/representative’s request and (ii) whether to proceed with the hearing in the absence of the appellant, but this discretion must be exercised judicially. In this case I am satisfied the FTT has done so. It gave significant consideration to these matters in its statement of reasons and it has considered issues in relation to the adjournment application including, inter alia, the information provided in the application to adjourn, the views of the other party, the number of previous adjournments and the reasons, the age of the case, the fact the case had been listed for a full session and the value (and scarcity) of Tribunal time, the likely time when the case could be relisted and the impact on other Tribunal users generally. I agree with the FTT that no one is entitled to an adjournment as of right. I would simply add that when considering applications for adjournment it is helpful to consider the triumvirate of issues set out by Upper Tribunal Judge Jacobs in MA v SSWP [2009] UKUT 211 (AAC) (CA/1546/2009)with the first consideration being the benefit of an adjournment, secondly why the party was not ready to proceed and finally the impact of an adjournment on the other party and the Tribunal system as a whole. I agree with Judge Jacobs’s view that it would be exceptional for an adjournment that would otherwise be granted to be refused solely on account of the needs of the system as a whole. The FTT must then go on to consider whether it is in the interests of justice to proceed with the hearing in the appellant’s absence. While less explicit consideration has been given to this issue in the written reasons I am satisfied, in the particular circumstances of this case, the FTT had sufficient grounds to come to the view it could fairly proceed in the appellant’s absence, I note in particular that FTT bundle is over 400 pages in length and contains extensive medical evidence. It was also clear the appellant and the representative had received notification of the hearing date.