Today I received a DECISION NOTICE from HMCTS (dated 13th Aug 2017). The same Judge that heard my ChB 1st Appeal on 24th April 2017 has refused to “Set Aside” her Decision, and has also refused me permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal Office.
So now I must apply directly to the Upper Tribunal Office myself!
This is the exact wording of this Judge’s DECISION NOTICE:
The Appellant has applied for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal issued on 24/4/2017.
No review/permission refused.
1. It is not appropriate to review the decision because I am not satisfied there is any error of law in the Tribunal’s decision. The appellant states that she is extremely disappointed with the FTT decision, especially as the Upper Tribunal has already bounced it back once already. The Upper Tribunal decision at paragraph 30 states that there will need to be a fresh hearing of the appeal before a new Tribunal. I should make it clear that I am making no finding, nor indeed expressing any view on whether or not the mother is entitled to child benefit for [daughter] for the material period. In order to be granted permission to appeal, the appellant must show that the tribunal made an error of law. It is clear that the appellant disagrees with the decision of the tribunal. However, it is also clear that the reason she disagrees is because her view of the facts is different to that of the tribunal. The sole decider of the facts is the tribunal which has adequately explained why it has reached its decision.
2. Permission to appeal is refused. No arguable question of law is disclosed by the application (for the reasons set out above).
The Tribunal consisted of just one person – the Judge. Having criticised the rationale of this Judge, it is then this same Judge that refuses to “Set Aside” her Decision of 24/4/17, and refuses me permission to Appeal to the Upper Tribunal! Why is the same Judge allowed to handle my “Set Aside” & UTO appeal request? If she’d done so, she would have been criticising her own original decision-making and incompetence. Where’s the oversight in all of this?