Hearings Before Administrative Tribunals

"The fourth edition of this handy reference provides the reader with a practical grasp of the essential principles of this discipline. This edition is expanded beyond the basic hearing that was addressed in the first edition to include discussions of the most important and pressing aspects of administrative law. The text provides a sound legal background for each topic and addresses practical problems that arise in day-to-day operations. The reader will find sufficient information to acquire a good grasp of those principles of administrative law that are of most importance not only to lawyers, but to agency members and staff, government decision-makers and students."--Pub. desc.

Existing legislation governing the procedures of adjudicative tribunals in Alberta is not up to date and limited in its coverage. The purpose of this report is to provide procedural rules that take into account case law developments relative to the requirements of natural justice and new procedures to enhance efficiency & effectiveness, and to make the rules available to all tribunals. The first chapter sets out the shortcomings of the existing legislation the Administrative Procedures Act, and the steps taken to develop a modernized Model Code of powers and procedures. Chapter 2 sets out principles on which the Code provisions are based. Chapter 3 contains recommendations with regard to the Code implementation process. Chapter 4 contains the Model Code itself in four sections: pre-hearing procedures, hearing powers & procedures, tribunal decisions & reasons, and miscellaneous powers. The final chapter contains draft legislation for adopting the Model Code.

This review of tribunals, the first for 44 years, examines the 70 different administrative tribunals in England and Wales. They deal with over a million cases a year, employ over 3500 people, and have become a substantial part of the system of justice. Yet, of the 70, only 20 each hear more than 500 cases a year; others are defunct; the quality of their work is variable; and cases take too long. The review has as its four main objectives: (1) to make the 70 tribunals into one Tribunals Service; (2) to make the tribunals independent of their sponsoring departments; (3) to improve the training of chairmen and members in the interpersonal skills required; (4) to enable unrepresented users to participate effectively and without apprehension in tribunal proceedings. The new Tribunals Service would provide a coherence essential if tribunals are to acquire a collective standing to match that of the court system. But there is also a basic need for a change in culture, with a greater focus on the users' needs, and swifter administration based on informality, simplicity, efficiency and proportionality. Without this culture change, the Review questions how tribunals can, as presently administered, find the independence, coherence, economies of scale, consistency, professionalism or IT, to which users are entitled.