Upper Tribunal reiterates correct process for applying for permission to appeal

In the face of an ongoing legal aid crisis meaning that far too many people are now having to navigate the appeal process without a lawyer, the Upper Tribunal has stated that it “cannot afford excessive indulgence for non-compliance with the requirements of the rules” by litigants in person (or by lawyers). The case is Rai & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Grounds of Appeal – Limited Grant of Permission) [2025] UKUT 150 (IAC).

The Upper Tribunal described the issue as:

There is a culture that has developed in statutory appeals of unfocused and poorly formulated grounds of appeal with excessive prolixity and complexity that impacts a proper consideration of the grounds when an application for permission to appeal is considered. This sometimes leads to a grant of permission to appeal on limited grounds, which, when properly considered at a hearing, are difficult to disentangle from grounds upon which permission was refused. That in turn causes unnecessary confusion when the appeal is heard regarding the scope of the appeal.

The headnote reads:

Grounds of Appeal

1.     Section 11(1) of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act (“the 2007 Act”) makes provision for an appeal to the Upper Tribunal on any point of law arising from any decision except an excluded decision.  In applying for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, practitioners have a duty to carefully consider whether a challenge to the judge’s findings of fact, or the application of the facts to the legal framework, is material to the outcome of the appeal.  Grounds of appeal are not an opportunity to present a list of errors no matter what the relevance of the error is to the outcome of the appeal.

2.     Whether a party is represented or not, they are required to identify the arguable errors of law in the grounds of appeal, adequately, so that the arguable error can be considered by a judge.

3.     Each point of law, where there is more than one, must be clearly and succinctly identified as a numbered ground of appeal with sufficient detail so that the Tribunal and the parties are able to identify the essential issue raised by that ground. The grounds of appeal will rarely need to be lengthy. Each ground of appeal should identify succinctly, in clearly numbered paragraphs or (sub paragraphs):

a.     The relevant passage(s) in the decision of the FtT.

b.     Any relevant primary or secondary legislation only to the extent necessary to do so.

c.      Any authority binding upon the judge that is capable of supporting the ground.

d.     Brief submissions proving a short explanation to support the ground.

4.     The Upper Tribunal is likely to take robust decisions and not permit grounds to be advanced if they have not been properly identified and pleaded, or where permission has not been granted to raise them. 

5.     Where there is any issue as to the grounds of appeal upon which permission has been granted, or the scope of the grounds that leads to an adjournment, the Tribunal may impose sanctions, including the making of orders for wasted costs against the parties or their representatives.

Permission to appeal on limited grounds

6.     Where a ground of appeal relates to a discrete aspect of the decision, limiting the grounds for granting permission to appeal can in a clear case, make the appellate process more efficient and focused.

7.     Unless a ground of appeal upon which permission is refused relates to a discrete aspect of the appeal, the Upper Tribunal, on appeal, should not be constrained from holistically considering critical issues capable of affecting the outcome of the appeal by limiting the grounds on which permission is granted.