[2023] UKUT 157 (AAC)

TBGS’s submissions made the point that the FTT had the “advantage” (over Mr Coombs) of having sight of the withheld information, including the structure and number of questions on the test. It was submitted that, from this, the TBGS witnesses were able to explain to the FTT how the items of information would benefit tutors. It was submitted that, as the FTT had the benefit of this knowledge (in the closed bundle), it was well able to test and understand the position, whilst having both parties’ contentions in mind.

These submissions do not, to my mind, “help”, “excuse” or “mitigate” any inadequacy of reasons in the FTT decision. As was said in Davies (see paragraph 18 above), the required standard of reasons in a closed procedure case is no lower than that required in any other case.