Hicks v Lovett (No. 2)

The case of Hicks v Lovett (No. 2) involved an appeal against a decision of a reconstituted tribunal. The appellants, Hicks and others, sought leave to appeal against the decision of the tribunal which had been made after the original tribunal was found to be improperly constituted. The respondents, Lovett and others, opposed the application for leave to appeal on the basis that the issues raised had already been determined by the original tribunal.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the appellants had established grounds for leave to appeal and whether the appeal should be allowed. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the errors made by the reconstituted tribunal amounted to substantial injustice and whether there was a denial of procedural fairness. The appellants argued that the tribunal had failed to address a critical issue from the original appeal, had not provided adequate reasons for its decision, and had not set out the law being applied. The respondents contended that the appellants had not identified any new grounds for appeal and that the issues had already been determined.

The court found that the appellants had established grounds for leave to appeal. The reconstituted tribunal had failed to address or make findings about a critical issue from the original appeal, and had not provided adequate reasons for its decision. The court held that the failure to give adequate reasons amounted to a denial of procedural fairness and that the errors of law for which leave should be granted to correct substantial injustice. The court also found that the reconstituted tribunal had not set out the law being applied, which was a further error of law. As a result, the court granted leave to appeal, allowed the appeal, set aside the orders made on 5 March 2020, and remitted the proceedings to an Adjudicator for rehearing.