[2024] UKUT 365 (AAC)

In the light of the Deputy Traffic Commissioner’s views, the Upper Tribunal gave case management directions which invited the Appellant to request that its appeal be determined on the papers. The directions informed the Appellant that its appeal would not be dismissed on the papers and that, if the Upper Tribunal panel convened to consider the appeal on the papers was minded to dismiss it, a hearing would be arranged. The Appellant requested that its appeal be determined on the papers.

Most regrettably, due to an administrative mistake neither the Deputy Traffic Commissioner’s observations nor the Upper Tribunal’s case management directions were included in the bundles prepared for the panel convened to decide the Appellant’s appeal on the papers. That panel dismissed the appeal which clearly came as something of a shock to an Appellant who had been informed that its appeal would not be dismissed on the papers.

Once the administrative mistake mentioned above came to light, the Upper Tribunal, acting under rule 43 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, set aside its decision dismissing the appeal on the ground that the proceedings involved a procedural irregularity, and it was in the interests of justice to set aside the decision. The Upper Tribunal’s set aside determination apologised to the Appellant for the worry caused by the original decision dismissing this appeal.

Arrangements were then made for this appeal to be decided on the papers before a differently constituted panel.