About Special Needs Labyrinth
New Appeal Registration Letters
Since April ’26, the Tribunal has started using a new template for their Tribunal registration letters, which is extremely different to previous versions, which have received little more than minor tweaks over the past few years.
Please do check YOUR order; it may well be different again to the one I have used to compile this document! I am also hopeful there will be a prompt update to this template.
Key changes:
· Updated bundle guidance
· Update to evidence submissions
· Guidance to contradict the update to evidence submissions
· Increased emphasis on the consequences for not adhering to this 21-page letter or subsequent orders
Bundle Guidance
In April ’25, bundle guidance ‘HESC Practice Direction 2025’ (PD) replaced the ‘SEND40’ guidance; however, the Tribunal continued to issue at registration the SEND40 guidance until November ’25, despite it expiring in July ’25. If you have an appeal registered BEFORE November ’25, you will have the wrong bundle guidance but will be expected to adhere to the new bundle guidance.
I have also seen a number of bundles that have been issued this year, that are still compiled using the SEND40 guidance. If this is yours, you must flag it with your LA and request it be reissued using Practice Directions 2025.
Submission of Evidence
This is where the confusion begins. Previously, parties had to share evidence, as soon as it was available, with the LA/Appellants and Tribunal at the same time; however, this new order, looks to change.
Stage 1: LA Response
e. [Parties] should not send that information to the Tribunal at this stage or in a piecemeal fashion. Their evidence and submissions should be supplied in accordance with stage 2 (final evidence deadline) below.
The statement above, ‘[Parties] should not send that information to the Tribunal at this stage or in a piecemeal fashion’, implies it must still be shared with Tribunal, just no longer as soon as it is available; however, below, that point is clarified, before being contradicted further down.
Stage 2: Final Evidence Deadline (FED)
a. The final evidence deadline applies to the exchange of written evidence between the parties. The evidence must not be copied to the Tribunal at the same time because the Tribunal will only consider evidence in the final Tribunal bundle.
b. All written or recorded evidence must be provided by the final evidence deadline. Evidence should NOT be provided in a piecemeal fashion prior to this date. It should be collected and submitted together by the finale [sic] evidence deadline.
Stage 4: Issuing the Final Tribunal Bundle
Previously referred to as the Original Bundle, continues to be referred to as the ‘Original Tribunal Bundle’ in the Practice Directions 2025 and recent court orders.
First point states ‘The final tribunal bundle […] is to be prepared in accordance with the Preparation of Bundles Practice Direction […].
If you check the PD, point 47 of the HESC Practice Directions 2025 states ‘47. Parties should use the bundle index to check that the bundle they receive contains all the documents that have been submitted to the Tribunal. But no documents should have been submitted to Tribunal?
Reverting back to the registration letter, clarification is provided by point e: Any evidence not received by the Tribunal by the final evidence deadline should not be included in the tribunal bundle.
At least it now agrees with the PD; all evidence must be received by tribunal by the final evidence deadline. But that now completely contradicts the statement ‘The evidence must not be copied to the Tribunal at the same time’.
From page 11, there is the usual table of Key Dates.
This contradicts the PD and Stage 4 guidance stating ‘the final evidence must not be copied to the Tribunal.’ It also contradicts Stage 2 stating, [Parties] must send to each other any final evidence […] as soon as it is available.’
It also continues to state ‘the LA must produce and send to Tribunal and [appellants] an electronic copy of the bundle and also deliver to parent(s) a paper copy of the bundle so that it is received by: the bundle submission deadline. A contradiction to Stage 4, point f: ‘Printed paper bundles need only be supplied by the LA to the appellant if one is specifically and reasonably requested (for example, by way of reasonable adjustment). The Tribunal’s default position is electronic.’
However, Practice Direction point 9 provides clarity to everything stating ‘Practice Direction supplements the Rules. In the event of a conflict between the Rules and this Practice Direction, the Rules take precedence.’
The HESC Rules do not give any information regarding evidence submissions; however, Rule 8 is clear ‘The Tribunal may strike out the whole or a part of the proceedings if— the applicant has failed to comply with a direction which stated that failure by the applicant to comply with the direction could lead to the striking out of the proceedings or part of them;’
Finally, something that does agree with the registration letter:
If there is a failure to comply with any part of these Directions without reasonable excuse, the Tribunal has a discretion to take action that may result in the listed hearing date for the case being vacated at short notice, striking out a case (rule 8) or barring a party from participating further in the appeal or claim. Further, it may result in certain limited circumstances in a costs order.
Come back soon for more entries.....
Come back sdoon to see the latest post!
Come back soon for more entries.....
Come back sdoon to see the latest post!