[2025] UKUT 306 (AAC)

CICA, as the interested party to these proceedings, filed a short response, drafted by Counsel and dated 30 April 2025. The response supports the application for judicial review on the very specific facts of the case. It invites the Upper Tribunal to remit TB’s appeal for reconsideration by a differently constituted First-tier Tribunal. The response emphasises that CICA reserves all rights to maintain that the application should not be allowed, whether for the reasons relied on in its decisions, or for other reasons.

The First-tier Tribunal has not responded to my decision granting permission to bring judicial review proceedings. Although the First-tier Tribunal is the Respondent to this matter, the usual position is that it will not take part in judicial review proceedings before the Upper Tribunal.

TB’s representatives wrote to the Upper Tribunal on 21 May 2025, stating they looked forward to receiving the Upper Tribunal’s decision given CICA confirmed it agreed to the matter being returned to the First-tier Tribunal. On 08 July 2025, TB emailed the Upper Tribunal directly, asking for an update on her matter and whether, if she had more evidence, she could send it to the Upper Tribunal. No further evidence was submitted, although the Upper Tribunal Office confirmed it could be sent in.

On 29 August 2025, TB’s representatives wrote to the Upper Tribunal with a draft consent order, signed by two of the three parties to the judicial review proceedings (TB and on behalf of CICA). TB’s representatives stated this draft order gave effect to CICA’s position set out in the response dated 30 April 2025.