ULUP2024

PM DR HASLINDA MOHD ANUAR

SCHOOL OF LAW

TRIBUNALS
Introduction
 Traditionally, the function of adjudicating upon disputes between
two individuals, or between the state and the individual, belongs
to the courts.
 But in modern times, a number of bodies have been established
by statutes outside the judicial system which determine a variety
of claims and disputes not only between an individual and a
department, but also between two individuals.
 A tribunal is a body set up by legislation to adjudicate upon
disputes in a specific area and which enjoys a degree of
autonomy.
 The tribunals are administrative only in the sense that most of
them deal with matters in which the administration has an
interest.
Introduction
 The characteristics of a tribunal -
 Its autonomy, its independence from department control.
▪ A tribunal offers better safeguards to the individual than
a mere administrative authority making a decision.
▪ Tribunal procedure is less formal that that of the court
but is more formal than that of bureaucracy.
Introduction
 Emerge as a control mechanism over the administration
▪ Even if an initial decision is arrived at within a
department, it may be reviewed by a tribunal and, thus,
a control mechanism is installed over the departmental
decision process.
Introduction
 Criticism against tribunal
 A tribunal is not as good a mechanism for deciding disputes as a
court.
 A tribunal has some links with administration.
 The tribunal members may not be legally trained , may not have
much knowledge of law and may find interpretation of the parent
statute a difficult exercise.
 Informality of procedure in a tribunal may degenerate into
complete lack of procedure resulting in whimsical decisions based
on no law, facts or evidence.
 The tribunal often do not give reasons for their decisions; their
decisions may not be published and people may not have any idea
as to how a tribunal will resolve the cases coming before it.
Introduction
 Tribunal decisions vs decisions by the ministers:
 The Frank Committee made 2 points for favouring a
tribunal over a minister for discharging adjudicatory
functions –
▪ A tribunal makes decisions by application of principles or
laws
▪ A tribunal is itself a considerable step towards the
realisation of the objectives of ‘openness, fairness and
impartiality’.
The rationale of creating tribunal

1. An expansion in the functions and responsibilities of the

administration
• Laws are being enacted to modify existing inter-personal
rights and obligations, or create new ones
• New laws occasion disputes between one individual and
another, or between an individual and a government
agency, and a machinery is needed to adjudicate upon
these disputes.
• If all these disputes were to be left to the traditional
judicial system, it will be overloaded with work
2. The court procedure is tardy, formal, rigid & expensive
• Most cases consist of small claims against the
administration which is not suitable before a court
• Procedure in a tribunal system is informal & less rigid.
The rationale of creating tribunal

3. The question of expertise

• A judge is a generalist and a lawyer need some expertise
in various other disciplines.
• In such diverse areas as housing, social services, town
planning, capacity for work, control of transport,
professional and trade disciplines, and the like, greater
technical experience, greater flexibility and greater
emphasis on social welfare are required than what the
ordinary judicial process.
4. Exercise of adjudicatory powers by administrators facilitate
and smoothens the administrative process.
Examples of tribunals in Malaysia

1. Special Commissioners of Income Tax

https://www.hasilnet.org.my/information-on-income-tax-appe
al/
2. The Industrial court
http://www.mp.gov.my/en/
3. The Tribunal for Consumer Claims
https://ttpm.kpdnkk.gov.my/portal/home
4. The Tribunals for Homebuyers Claims
http://www.kpkt.gov.my/index.php/pages/view/423?mid=43
Public inquiries
 Inquires differ from tribunals, for while evidence may be
tendered and received by both, a tribunal makes a decision
by itself, but in inquiry, the inquiry officer does not make any
decision; he reports his findings to some higher
administrative authority which makes the decision as to the
action to be taken.
 The purpose of holding an inquiry is primarily to gather
information and ascertain facts on the basis of which a
decision may then be made.
 The inquiry is by and large inquisitorial in nature though at
times it may also be accusatorial in nature.
Public inquiries
 In some cases, the purpose of the inquiry may be
democratise the administrative process by giving the public
an opportunity to express their objections to any proposed
government measure
 General statutory provision exists for the appointment of
inquiry commission.
 In Malaysia, the commission is issued by the YDPA under the
Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950 to inquire;
 The conduct of any officer or officers in the public services
 The conduct or management of any department of public services
 Any matter in which an inquiry would, in the opinion of the YDPA, be
for the public welfare.
Development of Tribunals in Britain

1. Earlier 20th century

 The UK tribunal system can be seen as beginning with the
coming into force of the National Insurance Act 1911 which
provided for adjudication of disputes by administrative
agencies. 
2. Post war (1945 - 1957)
 The Franks Report was published in July 1957 and its principle
effect was to move tribunals from an executive and
administrative model towards a judicial footing. Franks
identified three principles for the operation of tribunals.
 The report resulted in the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1958 which
established the Council on Tribunals, which started work in
1959.
Tribunal in Britain

3. Tribunal service
 The Tribunals Service was created in response to Sir
Andrew Leggatt’s review of the UK tribunal system,
entitled Tribunals for Users: One System, One Service,
published in August 2001.

4. Her Majesty’s Court and Tribunals Service

 In 2010 it was announced that the service would merge
with Her Majesty’s Court Service to form a new unified
body for all courts and tribunals in England and Wales.
 This merger took place on 1 April 2011 with the formation
of Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service.