or them to be much cheaper than the court system. It has been shown however that having legal representation at the tribunal can substantially increase the likelihood of success. In the Social Security Appeal Tribunal research showed that an applicant's chance of success rose from 30per cent to 48 per cent when they had legal representation. This casts some doubt about the system, which is supposed to be fair for all but has been proven that if you have a lawyer representing you the chances of success are greater.The advantage of choosing the tribunal system is that it is not strictly bound by the restrictions of rules of evidence and precedent. Although, tribunals are to some degree bound by the decisions of other tribunals they have a greater degree of flexibility in their decision-making powers. This in itself means that tribunals can give the appellant a greater chance of success especially since tribunals can admit evidence that a court might perhaps refuse to listen to, for example hearsay evidence.The use of experts within the tribunal system is exploited to a greater extent in tribunals; Doctors Chartered Surveyors and other professional experts can be called to give their opinion on certain forms of evidence. This is the same typically in the court system but in tribunals the Chairperson can ask questions themselves and ask for opinions, in the courts the experts are usually asked only to provide facts and conclusions are drawn from those presented. In De Smith and Brazier (1990) it is illustrated the ways in which tribunals often take an active part in finding out aspects of the information themselves. Tribunals can appear at times to be inquisitorial in the approach they tend not to rely solely on the facts presented by the two opposing sides.In 1957 the Franks Committee published a report that examined Tribunals and Enquiries its findings stated that the main principles for tribunals were that they be open, fair, imp...
