Case No. UKUT-00222-(IAC)

133. With the agreement of the parties, this judgment will be handed down by email. Negotiations between the parties regarding the form of order were unsuccessful. I have had regard to their submissions in formulating the order. In respect of each point of disagreement, I prefer the submissions made by Mr Malik. 134. Mr Malik has made brief written submissions in support of an application for permission to appeal. He submits that it is at least arguable that the respondent’s guidance is lawful and that the decision taken pursuant to it was also lawful. In the alternative, he submits that the ‘profound consequences’ of my decision are such that there is a compelling reason for the matter to be considered by the Court of Appeal. Mr Mackenzie submits that the former submission is unmeritorious and that the latter is for the Court of Appeal to decide. 135. Although I am not persuaded by Mr Malik’s first submission, I consider that there is another compelling reason for an appeal to be heard. As Stewart J observed in Carter , that reason is to be found in the impact on the fee waiver system and the important points of principle in the case. I grant permission to appeal on that basis. 136. If I understand CPR 52.16 correctly, it is a consequence of my decision to grant permission to appeal that the effect of my substantive decision is stayed pending the determination of the appeal. In the event that I am wrong in that, I order under rule 5(3)(l) of the Upper Tribunal Rules that the effect of my decision shall be suspended pending the appeal. ~~~~0~~~~