Immigration Appeals (Hansard, 12 November 1992)

§ Mr. Corbett
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department on what date Mr. J. I. Disley was appointed an adjudicator for the conduct of immigration appeal tribunal hearings; how many complaints of alleged unfair treatment by appellants or sponsors have been made about Mr. Disley's conduct of proceedings; and how many have been found to be(a) substantiated and (b) unsubstantiated.

Mr. John M. Taylor
Mr. J. R. Disley (sic) was appointed as an adjudicator of immigration appeals on 1 May 1991. Most appellants complain about the conduct of proceedings by an adjudicator by appealing to the immigration appeal tribunal. No statistics are maintained of the number of cases determined by individual adjudicators and taken to the tribunal. Complaints are also sometimes made to the chief adjudicator. There has been one such complaint in relation to proceedings conducted by Mr. Disley but it was sub judice at the time and the matter was dealt with as part of the appeal by the tribunal which ultimately dismissed the appeal. The chief adjudicator sees every tribunal determination and where necessarry he or the appropriate regional adjudicator brings the matter to the attention of the adjudicator concerned.

§ Mr. Corbett
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many complaints of alleged unfair treatment by an adjudicator at immigration appeal hearings have been lodged with the chief adjudicator of immigration appeals, in each of the last five years; and how many have been found to be(a) substantiated and (b) unsubstantiated.

Mr. John M. Taylor
No statistics have been maintained as to complaints made directly to the chief adjudicator.

§ Mr. Corbett
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what is the workload expected to be undertaken by persons appointed to be adjudicators at immigration appeal tribunal hearings.

Mr. John M. Taylor
Adjudicators of immigration appeals (as opposed to immigration appeal tribunal members) who are full time normally sit for five days each week as and when required, including, where necessary, weekends and public holidays. They are allowed 30 days leave a year plus 10½ days public holidays and privilege days (or days in lieu of these). Part-time adjudicators sit for a seven-hour day. The Lord Chancellor expects part-time adjudicators to sit for at least 20 days but not more than 50 days a year (unless the person concerned is retired or a consultant in which case the maximum can be relaxed to 70 days). The precise number of days sat will vary within these parameters.
860W

§ Mr. Corbett
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what is the current remuneration of adjudicators at immigration appeal tribunal hearings, including any expenses; and what was the level from which it was last raised.

Mr. John M. Taylor
The current remuneration of full-time adjudicators of immigration appeals (as opposed to immigration appeal tribunal members) is £52,520 a year. Part-time adjudicators are paid a daily fee of £215. These figures were raised in April 1992 from £50,500 and £207 respectively. Since full-time adjudicators are allocated to a particular hearing centre the question of expenses does not usually arise. Part-time adjudicators are entitled to a first class rail fare to and from the hearing centre (or a mileage allowance if a private car is used). Where their total time exceeds seven hours they are entitled to claim additional expenses for writing up determinations pro rata to their daily fee.

§ Mr. Corbett
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what is the current number of immigration appeal tribunal adjudicators; and if he will give details of sex, age, ethnic background and professional or other qualification.

Mr. John M. Taylor
The relevant information relating to immigration adjudicators (who are not part of the immigration appeal tribunal which deals with appeals from decisions of the adjudicators) is as follows.
There are 17 full-time adjudicators. They are all men. Their ages are 41, 47, 50, 57 (two adjudicators), 59, (two adjudicators), 60 (four adjudicators), 61, 62, 65 (two adjudicators), 67 and 68. Two of them are known to be from the ethnic minorities. Eight are barristers, seven are solicitors, one is a Scottish advocate and one is an experienced civil servant with a history degree.
There are 81 part-time adjudicators: 63 are men and 18 are women. Their ages are 36, 37 (two adjudicators), 39 (two adjudicators), 40 (four adjudicators), 41 (two adjudicators), 42 (six adjudicators), 43, 44 (three adjudicators), 46 (three adjudicators), 47 (seven adjudicators), 48 (three adjudicators), 49 (two adjudicators), 52 (four adjudicators), 53, 54 (four adjudicators), 55 (three adjudicators), 56, 57 (three adjudicators), 58, 60 (three adjudicators), 61 (four adjudicators), 62 (five adjudicators), 62 (two adjudicators), 64 (two adjudicators), 65, 66 (four adjudicators), 67 (two adjudicators), 68, 69, 70 (two adjudicators) and 71. Four are known to be from the ethnic minorities. Twenty-nine are barristers, 50 are solicitors, one is an academic lawyer and one is a non-law graduate.

§ Mr. Corbett
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many immigration appeal tribunal adjudicators have been removed in each of the last five years following complaints of alleged unfair treatment by appellants or sponsors about the adjudicator which have been found to be substantiated.

Mr. John M. Taylor
Adjudicators of immigration appeals are not part of the immigration appeal tribunal which has appellate jurisdiction over decisions of the adjudicators. No adjudicator has been removed in any of the last five years.
861W

§ Mr. Corbett
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what action the chief adjudicator of immigration appeals takes when a complaint of alleged unfair treatment at an immigration appeal hearing by an adjudicator is found to be substantiated.

Mr. John M. Taylor
Most appellants complain about the conduct of proceedings by an adjudicator by appealing to the immigration appeal tribunal. The chief adjudicator sees every tribunal determination and where necessary he or the appropriate regional adjudicator bring the matter to the attention of the adjudicator concerned. Where there is a direct complaint to the chief adjudicator he refers the matter to that adjudicator and, where he feels it sufficiently serious, to the Lord Chancellor.

§ Mr. Corbett
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department whether those making complaints of alleged unfair treatment by an adjudicator at immigration appeal hearings to the chief adjudicator are interviewed to obtain precise details of such complaints.

Mr. John M. Taylor
If complainants seek an interview with the chief adjudicator it is never refused.

§ Mr. Corbett
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department by what process the chief adjudicator of immigration appeals investigates complaints of alleged unfairness in the conduct of appeal hearings by an adjudicator.

Mr. John M. Taylor
Most appellants complain about the proceedings by an adjudicator by appealing to the immigration appeal tribunal. The chief adjudicator sees all determinations by the tribunal and where necessary he or the appropriate regional adjudicator bring the matter to the attention of the adjudicator concerned. Complaints may also be made directly to the chief adjudicator who will investigate the complaint, seek the comments of the adjudicator concerned and respond as he thinks appropriate.