National Insurance Local Tribunals: A Research Study – Part II

Abstract

Tribunals, now recognized as key institutions of the Welfare State, are attracting a good deal of attention. Despite a growing volume of criticism little systematic research has been undertaken into the way they actually function. Since almost every British citizen has rights of appeal to national insurance local tribunals (NILTs) it would seem that they constitute a good starting point. An earlier article presented a general view of NILTs. This paper examines the way the appeal system works from several different perspectives. Difficulties encountered by ordinary citizens at various stages in the appeal process are discussed. The research findings on attendance, representation and success rates are analysed. Attendance by the appellant at the hearing of his appeal is shown to be of particular significance. It is also clear that expansion of facilities for providing advice and representation would be advantageous to appellants. Problems connected with expansion of these facilities are discussed, and an ‘ideal type’ representative is outlined. This leads to a discussion of different tribunal models and a ‘participation model’ is developed. Finally, some implications of the research findings for the development of social policy are considered.

Lay Participation in Decision Making: A Croatian Perspective on Mixed Tribunals

“…Based on research results known as 'The Bell Report' (Bell et al 1974;Bell et al 1975;Bell 1982), the legislature passed a new law which introduced the requirement that all chairmen of the social security appeal tribunals should be legally qualified. The transition was gradual, and between 1984 and 1989 the tribunals were presided over by either legally qualified chairmen or lay chairmen.…”