Applying the rule 43(3) time limit; applications for an extension of time
70. Rule 43(3) requires that any application to set aside a decision must be received by the Tribunal “no later than one month after the date on which the Upper Tribunal sent notice of the decision to the party” . By rule 5(3), case management powers permit the Tribunal to extend time for complying with any rule. The overwhelming majority of rule 43 applications received by the Tribunal following Fordham J’s judgment in the JCWI case were received later than one month following notice of error of law decisions. Fordham J’s judgment was handed down on 20 November 2020. The Order made recorded the President’s undertaking to take such steps as were necessary to bring the judgment to the attention of all individuals who had lost error of law appeals on or after 23 March 2020. We have been told that a so-called “JCWI pack” containing Fordham J’s judgment and order was sent to all relevant parties on 4 December 2020. A further copy, also containing an information note from the JCWI was sent on 11 December 2020. These packs were sent by email to represented parties and by post to those without representation. Most of the parties before us refer to having received the pack at some time in the first half of December. Each of the applicants before us was legally represented at the material time and the packs were sent to those representatives. Given the need on receipt of the JCWI packs for the legal representatives to seek and obtain instructions on whether to make any further application to the Tribunal, and given also the Christmas and New Year period and the disruption at that time caused by the second COVID-19 lockdown, we accept, without need for specific explanation, that an extension of time should be granted in respect of any application received by the Tribunal by or before Monday 18 January 2021. Where applications presently before us were received after that date we will consider whether to grant an extension of time on the facts of the case in hand.
(1)
- Introduction
- Relevant Provisions
- “34. — Decision with or without a hearing
- Making Certain Appeal Decisions Without A Hearing
- The Tribunal’s power to set aside its own decisions
- Rule 34 Decisions and rule 43 “procedural irregularity”
- The Secretary of State’s submission
- The significance of the Guidance Note, per se
- The significance of reference (or lack of reference) to the Guidance Note or other matters.
- The significance of directions given by the Tribunal: pre-judgment of the rule 34 decision.
- in electronic form
- who considers that despite the forgoing directions a hearing is necessary
- The directions in paragraph 2 above must be complied with in every case.
- Consent; failure to comply with the direction permitting submission in opposition to the provisional view.
- Appearance of bias
- Final observations on generic matters
- Applying the rule 43(3) time limit; applications for an extension of time
- (HU/18412/2019)
- (PA/09206/2019)
- (PA/4768/2019)
- (HU/8693/2017)
- TO & BO (Nigeria)
- (HU/04826/2019 & HU/04831/2019)
- (HU/4735/2019)
- (10)
- (11)
- (12)
- (13)
- (14)
- (15)
- (HU/13731/2019)
- (17)
- (18)
- (PA/05994/2019)
- Disposal
- Mr Justice Swift
