[2024] UKUT 245 (AAC)

I therefore conclude that the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involves an error of law in that it has not dealt with Request (4). I allow the appeal and set aside the decision under section 12(2)(a) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

I am not in a position to remake the decision which must be remitted for consideration of Request (4). Remission will be to the same Tribunal panel as there is no reason to doubt their professionalism or ability to approach the Request (4) issue with an open mind. It is a point that they have simply not dealt with at all in the first decision.

I am aware that the appellant requested that his case be dealt with by “a BAME judge”. However, cases are not allocated to judges on discriminatory bases such as that. All judges swear the judicial oath to “do right to all manner of people … without fear or favour, affection or ill-will” and all judges of the relevant First-tier Tribunal chamber are in principle able to deal with this case. In any event, one Tribunal has already dealt with this case and it would not be an efficient use of public resources (or in accordance with the overriding objective) to remit this to a different Tribunal, provided the original Tribunal is still available to hear it.

The case must (under section 12(2)(b)(i)) be remitted for re-hearing in respect of Request (4) only by the same tribunal subject to the directions above.