[2024] UKUT 329 (AAC)

Why there was no oral hearing of this application

The Upper Tribunal has a discretion whether to hold an oral hearing before making a decision. See rule 34(1) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 (“the UT Rules 2008”). The test I have to apply is whether: “fairness requires such a hearing in the light of the facts of the case and the importance of what is at stake”: R (Osborn) v Parole Board [2014] AC 1115at paragraph 2(i). In exercising my discretion, I must have regard to the parties’ views: (see rule 34(2) of the UT Rules 2008).

In his UT1 application form, JG asked for his application to be determined on the papers. JG wrote his mental health, anxiety and depression made it a difficult situation. I considered JG’s preferences and reviewed the file. I did not identify a compelling reason to hold an oral hearing. The issues were clear from the papers. Listing the appeal for an oral hearing would inevitably introduce further delay in dealing with it. I therefore exercised my discretion to consider this matter on the paper alone. It was proportionate and in the interests of justice to do so.