[2024] UKUT 344 (AAC)

SCK attended the hearing, as did Mr Serr representing DBS. We are grateful to them both, for presenting their respective arguments clearly.

SCK, representing himself, also gave evidence at the hearing, including via cross examination and answering questions from the panel.

The “permission” hearing was held on the CVP video platform; the case management directions that followed gave the parties the opportunity to express a preference as between “video” and “face to face” for the substantive hearing (the context being that SCK lived near Cardiff); DBS expressed a preference for “video”, based in part on SCK’s successfully participation in the “permission” hearing; SCK did not express a preference. Judge Citron directed that the substantive hearing be held on the CVP video platform, as it was fair and just to do so, given SCK’s ability to participate in such a hearing (demonstrated by the experience of the “permission” hearing), DBS’s preference, and the fact that an Upper Tribunal hearing could be listed sooner by “video” than “face to face” in a venue close to SCK’s home (such as Cardiff), given delays in securing courts in venues other than the Upper Tribunal’s regular venue in central London. The panel was satisfied that, in the event, SCK participated in the hearing on 2 August 2024 fully, fairly and justly.