Tribunals and gender recognition statistics quarterly: July to September 2014
Source: data.gov.uk (2018-05-25)

Tribunals and Gender Recognition Statistics. The bulletin presents the latest statistics on type and volume of tribunal cases received, disposed of and outstanding and the number of Gender Recognition Certificates applied for and granted.  

The bulletin focuses on information on receipts (i.e. cases received by HMCTS), the outcome of cases by category (e.g. cases disposed of at hearing) and the caseload outstanding (snapshot of live cases at a specific point in time) for the three largest tribunals: Employment, Immigration and Asylum, and Social Security and Child Support. Additional data are available on timeliness, jurisdiction, Employment Tribunal fees, smaller tribunals, Employment Appeal Tribunal and regional receipts for the Employment Tribunal (management information). 

Annual data are published as follows:
* Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal annual statistics are published in September; these include information on representation of claimants, compensation and costs awarded in the Employment Tribunal for the financial year.
* Data from the Special Educational Needs and Disability tribunals covering the academic year are published in December. Further breakdowns include information on the number of appeals registered by type and nature of special education need, and outcomes.
* The number of adjournments and postponements by jurisdiction are published annually in June, along with the number of judicial salaried and fee-paid sittings by jurisdiction.

In addition to monitoring tribunal workloads and timeliness, they are used to assist in the development, monitoring and evaluation of tribunal related policy in collaboration with other Government departments, e.g. DWP, BEIS and Home Office.

Tribunals and Gender 
Recognition Certificate 
Statistics Quarterly  
July to September 2014 
 
Including the annual Special Educational and 
Disability (SEND) Tribunal figures  
 
Ministry of Justice 
Statistics bulletin 
11 December 2014


Contents 
Introduction 
2 
Key Findings 
4 
  1. Receipts 
5 
  2. Disposals 
10 
  3. Caseload Outstanding 
14 
  4. Timeliness 
16 
  5. Special Educational and Disability Tribunals for England 
20 
  6. Gender Recognition Certificate Statistics 
25 
Annex A: Data quality and sources 
30 
Annex B: Tribunal and Juristiction list 
32 
Annex C: Monthly & Regional Employment Tribunal Receipts  
33 
Annex D: Accompanying Tables and files 
38 
Annex E: Policy Changes 
41 
Annex F: Useful Publications 
43 
Contacts 
45 

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Introduction 
Tribunals are specialist judicial bodies which decide disputes in particular 
areas of law. Appeals to tribunals are generally against a decision made 
by a Government department or agency. The exception to this is the 
Employment Tribunal where cases are on a party v party basis 
(specifically, employee versus employer). There are tribunals in England, 
Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland covering a wide range of areas 
affecting day-to-day life. HM Courts & Tribunals (HMCTs) administers 
many of them although some are the responsibility of the devolved 
governments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.  
This report focuses on information on receipts (e.g. the acceptance of a 
case by HMCTS), the outcome of cases by category (e.g. cases disposed 
of at hearing) and the caseload outstanding for the three largest tribunals 
(Employment (ET), Immigration and Asylum (IA) and Social Security and 
Child Support (SSCS)). These three largest tribunals account for over 90% 
of tribunal receipts in 2013/14, however this is lower in later quarters. 
There is an additional section in annex C for Employment Tribunals giving 
monthly and regional breakdowns of Receipts.  
From this quarter’s publication onwards, Gender Recognition Certificate 
statistics will also be included in this report, previously being a separate 
publication. 
Once a year, in December, an additional section is included for Special 
Educational Needs and Disability Tribunals, covering the previous 
academic year – in this bulletin, 2013/14. 
Excel tables that accompany this report contain details of the smaller 
volume tribunals which are not covered in the text presented here.  A full 
list of all tribunals covered by HMCTS can be found in Table B.1 of the 
accompanying tables. Note that this publication does not include data on 
tribunals not covered by HMCTS. We also have accompanying CSV files 
containing the same data as in the Excel tables, but in a machine readable 
format. This allows users to conduct their own analysis, and is part of the 
Ministry of Justice’s commitment to open data. 
Further information on MOJ and HMCTS statistics, including information 
on the data sources and terminology used in this report, can be found in 
the Guide to Court and Administrative Justice Statistics. 
www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-court-and-administrative-
justice-statistics 
The next publication of Tribunal and Gender Recognition Certificate 
Statistics Quarterly is scheduled to be published on 12 March 2015, 
covering the period October to December 2014. 
 
2

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
 
3
Users of the statistics 
The main users of these statistics are Ministers and officials in central 
government responsible for developing policy with regards to tribunals. 
Other users include lawyers and academics, other central government 
departments such as BIS and DWP, and non-governmental bodies, 
including various voluntary organisations, with an interest in administrative 
justice.  

Key Findings 
This report presents the latest statistics on type and volume of Tribunal 
cases that are received, disposed of or outstanding as of the second 
quarter of the financial year 2014/15 (July to September 2014). From this 
quarter onwards, a chapter on Gender Recognition Panel Statistics will be 
included.  
This report also includes the annual Special Educational Needs and 
Disability Tribunal (SEND) figures, which relate to the academic year 
2013/14. 
Receipts and Disposals 
HMCTS tribunals recorded 83,500 receipts and 102,700 disposals in the 
period July to September 2014, which is 61% and 53% respectively lower 
than the same period of 2013. This has been driven by reductions in 
Social Security and Child Support appeals and Employment claims.   
 
Caseload outstanding  
For all tribunals combined, the caseload outstanding at the end of 
September 2014 was 606,400, 35% lower than last year, largely due to a 
decline in receipts.  
 
Timeliness 
The average time taken for cases to be cleared has increased across all 
three main tribunal types. In the most recent quarter (July to September 
2014), half of all Social Security and Child Support Tribunal cases were 
cleared in 18 weeks or less, one week longer than in July to September 
2013. For Immigration and Asylum, average clearance time was 28 weeks 
or less (up from 21 weeks or less the previous year), and for Employment 
Tribunal single claims, it was 27 weeks or less (up 10 weeks on July to 
September 2013).1 
 
Special Educational Needs and Disability 
In the academic year 2013/14, there were 4,100 Special Educational 
Needs appeals; 13% higher than seen in the previous academic year. In 
2013/14, 20% of cases were decided by the tribunal and of these, 83% 
decided in favour of the appellant.  
 
Gender Recognition Panel 
In July to September 2014, of the 76 applications that were received by 
the Gender Recognition Panel, 54 were processed and 80% of these were 
granted a full Gender Recognition Certificate. The proportion of claims that 
were registered female at birth was the highest ever, at 47%. 
                                            
1 Timeliness differs by Tribunal jurisdiction, which reflects the different processes and 
types of cases. As such, direct comparisons across different types of Tribunals are 
difficult and should be treated with caution. 

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
1. Receipts  
HMCTS Tribunals recorded 83,464 receipts in the period July to 
September 2014. This is up 12% on the previous quarter, and down 61% 
when compared with the same period of 2013. Social Security and Child 
Support (SSCS) accounts for 30% of these receipts, a further 26% were 
First Tier Immigration and Asylum (IA), and 16% were Employment 
Tribunals (ET). 
Figure 1 shows trends in both receipts and disposals since Q1 2008/09. 
Typically the number of receipts has been greater than the number of 
disposals. However, since Q2 2013/14, HMCTS has disposed of more 
tribunal claims than it received. Note that these figures are receipts and 
disposals in the quarter being reported, and receipts in one period are 
likely to be dealt with in subsequent periods.  
Figure 1: Receipts and disposals for all Tribunals, 2008/09 to 2014/15 
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Number of receipts and disposals
 (thousands)
Receipts
Disposals
 
What has driven this? 
Figure 2 illustrates the receipts by the largest jurisdictions. As SSCS is the 
largest jurisdiction, this drives the overall trend. Fewer appeals against 
decisions made by the DWP were received by the tribunal in July to 
September 2014 (10% higher than last quarter, and 81% lower than the 
same period last year). This could be due to a number of reasons 
including the introduction of mandatory reconsideration across DWP 
benefits - where a DWP decision-maker looks again at individual cases 
 
5

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
before it goes to a tribunal - alongside wider reforms to streamline the 
system, explained in the SSCS section below.   
Employment tribunal receipts also decreased, with receipts of single 
claims being 61% lower than July to September 2013.  
Figure 2: Tribunal receipts by jurisdiction, 2008/09 to 2014/15 
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
2010/11 
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Number of receipts (thousands)
Social Security and 
Child Support
 
Employment
Immigration and Asylum
All Tribunals
                                           
Employment Tribunals (Table 1.2) 
Claims in employment tribunals can be classified into either single2 or 
multiple3 claims. Single claims are made by a sole employee/worker, 
relating to alleged breaches of employment rights. Multiple claims are 
where two or more people bring proceedings arising out of the same facts, 
usually against a common employer. Both single and multiple claims can 
involve one or more jurisdictional complaints. Where claims are grouped 
as multiples, they are processed administratively and managed judicially 
together. We call these groups of claims ‘multiple claims cases’.  
 
2 A claim may be brought under more than one jurisdiction or subsequently amended or 
clarified in the course of proceedings, but will be counted as a claim only once. 
3 Multiple cases are where two or more people bring claims, involving one or more 
jurisdiction(s) usually against a single employer but not necessarily so, for instance in 
Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations (TUPE) cases, and 
always arising out of the same or very similar circumstances. As a multiple, the cases are 
processed together. 
 
6

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
A claim (either single or multiple) can be brought under one or more of 
different jurisdictions, for example under Age Discrimination or Equal Pay. 
Therefore the number of jurisdictional complaints is always greater than 
the total tribunal claims accepted. On average in July to September 2014, 
there were 2.0 jurisdictional complaints per case. 
In employment tribunals, the number of single claims received in July to 
September 2014 was 4,252 – 61% fewer than in the same period of 2013, 
but 12% higher than last quarter. The trend in single claims had been 
gradually declining for the last five years, but the rate of decline increased 
in October to December 2013. The fall in receipts for Employment 
Tribunals seen from October to December 2013 coincides with the 
introduction of employment tribunal fees in July 2013. Further information 
on this Policy can be found in Policy Changes section, page 38. 
The number of multiple claims in July to September was 9,360, which 
related to 401 multiple claim cases. The number of multiple claims cases 
has been falling over the last few quarters, from around 1,000 in July to 
September 2013 to around 400 in July to September 2014.  
The trend in multiple claims is more volatile than single claims due to large 
numbers of claims against a single employer which can skew the national 
figures and have to be resubmitted each quarter (such as the airline 
industry cases over the last few years which are now mainly disposed). 
This is illustrated in Figure 3 below. As the number of single and multiple 
claims are on such different scales, they have been indexed with a 
baseline of Q1 2009/10 = 1. 
 
7

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Figure 3: Index of ET multiple and single claim receipts4 
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Index of receipts
Multiples
Singles
Baseline: 2009/10 Q1
                                           
 
Immigration and Asylum5 (Table 1.3) 
In the period July to September 2014, there were 21,932 First-tier 
Immigration and Asylum receipts; a decrease of 20% when compared with 
the same period in 2013. In the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum 
Tribunal (UTIAC) there were 1,987 receipts, a decrease of 4% when 
compared with the same period in 2013.  
All but one of the large First-tier jurisdictions saw reductions in receipts in 
July to September 2014, compared to the same period in 2013. Asylum 
was the only category which saw an increase of 8%.  
Managed Migration appeals are generated by people already in the UK 
who have been refused permission to extend their stay. This type of case 
comprised just over half (51%) of all Immigration and Asylum receipts in 
July to September 2014 (down 18% compared with a year earlier). 
Managed Migration was also the highest proportion of cases in the Upper 
Tribunal, accounting for 56% of all such appeals and saw a 14% increase 
compared to the same period in the previous year. 
Entry Clearance appeals fell by 4% since last year in the First Tier 
Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber (FTTIAC) and by 21% in the 
 
4 The index compares the number of receipts with the baseline quarter. It shows the trend 
in single and multiple receipts but does not enable comparisons of the numbers of each.  
5 An independent Tribunal dealing with appeals against decisions made by the Home 
Secretary and Home Office officials in immigration, asylum and nationality matters 
 
8

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC). Family Visit 
Visas decreased by 53% in the FTTIAC and 13% in the UTIAC. There 
have been two changes to Family Visit Visa appeal rights in the last two 
years. Firstly, the Immigration Appeals (Family Visitor) Regulations 2012 
which came into force on 9 July 2012, which restricted the right of appeal 
to a narrower definition of family visitor6. Secondly, the Crime and Courts 
Act 2013 removed the full right of appeal for family visitors and this change 
came into effect for new visa applicants on 25 June 2013.  A limited right 
of appeal still remains on Human Rights or Race Discrimination grounds. 
Social Security and Child Support (Table 1.4) 
In July to September 2014, there were 24,969 SSCS receipts; a decrease 
of 81% when compared with the same period in 2013. In particular, there 
was a decrease of 86% in receipts of appeals made against decisions 
about claims for Employment Support Allowance (ESA) - this comprises 
42% of all claims to the tribunal in the most recent quarter.  Job Seekers 
Allowance (JSA) appeals also fell by 94% in July to September 2014 
compared with the previous year – these account for 5% of all SSCS 
tribunal cases,. 
Disability Living Allowance (DLA), which also accounts for 5% of SSCS 
Tribunal claims in the most recent quarter, had a 90% drop compared to 
the same period in 2013. 
The large decline in Social Security and Child Support Tribunal claims 
may be attributed to the policy changes implemented by The Department 
of Work and Pensions (DWP) and Her Majesty’s Court and Tribunal 
Service (HMCTS) in April 2013. These changes included DWP 
reconsidering all decisions before an appeal can be lodged direct with the 
Tribunal. Further information on this Policy can be found in the Policy 
changes section of the publication, page 38. 
                                            
6 www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/newsarticles/2012/june/25-family-visit-visa-
appeal  
 
9

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
2. Disposals 
A disposal is the closure of a case when work is complete. This can be 
through a claim being withdrawn, settled, dismissed or being decided at a 
hearing (either orally or on paper). 
There were a total of 102,710 cases or claims disposed of in July to 
September 2014. This represents a decrease of 53% on those cases 
disposed of in the same period in 2013. There was a reduction of 14% on 
the previous quarter, possibly as an impact of the reduction in receipts. 
This is the lowest number of quarterly disposals since this statistical series 
began in 2008/09. 
What has driven this? 
Figure 4 shows disposals by the main tribunals. As SSCS is the largest 
jurisdiction, it drives the trend in disposals. SSCS disposals in July to 
September 2014 were 76% lower than in July to September 2013. This is 
likely to be related to the reduction in receipts seen in previous quarters.  
Figure 4: Disposals by Tribunal, 2008/09 to Quarter 2 2014/15 
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Number of disposals (thousands)
All Tribunals
Social Security and Child Support
Immigration and Asylum 
Employment
 
Employment Tribunals (Tables 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3) 
Employment tribunals disposed of 19,602 claims during July to September 
2014, 28% lower than the same period in 2013. The number of disposals 
for single claims decreased by 62% and the number for multiple claims 
increased by 1%. The disposal rates for multiple cases are more volatile, 
and have been affected by disposals of a few large cases. The 14,814 
 
10

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
multiple claims disposed of in July to September 2014 actually related to 
864 multiple claim cases. This gives an average of 17 claims per case, 
although in reality there is likely to be a large number of smaller multiple 
cases and a few large cases, such as the Working Time Directive airline 
cases.  
Figure 5: Index of ET single and multiple disposals 
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Index of disposals
Multiples
Baseline: 2009/10 Q3
Singles
 
In July to September 2014, 31,094 jurisdictional claims were disposed of, 
a decrease of 49% from same period of the previous year. On average, 
1.6 jurisdictions were disposed of per claim, slightly lower than previous 
quarters.  
Of the jurisdictional complaints that were disposed of: 
 
19% were for unauthorised deductions (Formerly Wages Act); 
 
13% were for unfair dismissal; 
 
23% were for equal pay; 
 
17% were for sex discrimination  
Three new outcome types came into effect in the second quarter of 
2013/14, as a result of the Underhill Review of Employment Tribunal Rules 
(see Introduction). These were: 
 
11

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
 
Dismissed Rule 27 – complaints dismissed by an Employment 
Judge after initial consideration of claim and response7. 
 
Dismissed upon withdrawal – under new rule 52, an employment 
tribunal shall issue a judgment dismissing a claim where the 
claimant withdraws it, unless certain criteria are satisfied8. 
 
Case discontinued – this records complaints dismissed under rule 
40(1) where a party has not satisfied requirements in respect of 
paying a tribunal fee or demonstrating a case for remission9. 
‘Dismissed upon withdrawal’ accounted for 8% of all disposals in July to 
September 2014. ‘Dismissed Rule 27’ and ‘Case discontinued’ combined 
accounted for less than 1%. A fifth of claims were resolved by ACAS, and 
46% were withdrawn. 
Immigration and Asylum (Tables 2.4 and 2.5) 
The First-tier Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber (FTTIAC) 
disposed of 23,576 appeals, 8 per cent higher than July to September 
2013. The Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC) 
disposed of 2,479 appeals in July to September 2014, an increase of 25% 
on July to September 2013.  
Managed Migration accounted for 57% of the First-tier disposals in July to 
September 2014, with Entry Clearance Officer and Family Visit Visa 
appeals accounting for 18% and 12% respectively. Of the 23,576 
disposals, 72% were determined i.e. a decision was made by a judge at a 
hearing or on the papers; 16% were withdrawn; 10% were invalid or out of 
time, and 2% were struck out. Rules to allow cases to be struck out10 were 
introduced following the introduction of fee charging.  
Managed Migration accounted for 55% of the Upper Tribunal disposals in 
July to September 2014, with Entry Clearance Officer and Asylum appeals 
accounting for 21% and 14% respectively. Of the 2,479 disposals, 80% 
were determined i.e. a decision was made by a judge at a hearing or on 
the papers; 5% were withdrawn and 14% were remitted.  
 
                                            
7 Under Rule 27, an Employment Judge can dismiss a claim, or any part of a claim, if s/he 
considers that it has no reasonably prospect of success, or that the tribunal has no 
jurisdiction to hear the claim (or part thereof). This is a new provision introduced on July 
29th 2013.  
8 Again, this provision is new to the rules of procedure. Its operation is being monitored 
through these statistics to monitor impact of the rule. 
9 See footnote [11]. 
10 Appeal closed administratively where the fee has not been paid, remitted or exempted. 
 
12

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Of the 16,998 cases that were determined in the First-tier Tribunal in July 
to September 2014, 60% were dismissed and 40% allowed. For the Upper 
Tribunal, of the 1,994 cases determined during the same period, 67% 
were dismissed and 33% allowed. 
Social Security and Child Support (Tables 2.6 and 2.7) 
Of the 36,787 SSCS cases disposed of in July to September 2014; 45% 
were for ESA; 11% for Disability Living Allowance and 6% for JSA.  
82% of all SSCS cases were cleared at a hearing. Of these the overturn 
rate11 was 47%, i.e. 47% had the initial decision revised in favour of the 
claimant. This has increased from 39% in the same quarter last year.   
The overturn rate varies by benefit type with 55% of ESA cases, 49% of 
Disability Living Allowance and 45% of JSA cases that were cleared at 
hearing having the original decision revised in favour of the claimant.
                                            
11 The overturn rate is the rate of decisions by the original body that are reversed 
 
13

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
3. Caseload Outstanding 
At the end of September 2014, the caseload outstanding was 606,427. 
This is 35% lower than the same period last year (see Figure 6). This is 
driven by drops in outstanding cases in both the employment and SSCS 
jurisdictions.  
The published statistics cover receipts, disposals and caseload 
outstanding in the tribunal service over a specific period of time. Tribunals 
cover a range of different jurisdictions and work with a number of different 
live case management databases. The live caseload (caseload 
outstanding) is based on a snapshot of live cases at a specific point in 
time, once taken it cannot be revised or revisited. Because of 
this approach the caseload outstanding is currently based on a snapshot 
of the caseload on a specific day, and the change is not 
simply calculated by subtracting receipts and disposals. 
Figure 6: Caseload outstanding at end of September 2014 
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1,000
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Caseload outstanding (thousands)
All tribunals
Social Security and Child Support
Employment
Immigration and Asylum
 
Caseload Outstanding (Table 3.1) 
The caseload outstanding in the First-tier Immigration and Asylum tribunal 
saw a decrease of 2% compared to last quarter. Most (75%) of the 
outstanding caseload at the end of the quarter related to 'multiple' claims 
in Employment Tribunals. Multiple claims are often legally and factually 
complex and it is common for action on such claims to be deferred 
(‘stayed’, or ‘sisted’ in Scotland), for example pending the outcome of 
proceedings in appellate courts/tribunals on case management or other 
interim matters. This means that such claims are not yet ready to have a 
 
14

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
final hearing in the employment tribunal, and so the claim cannot be 
progressed to disposal. Resubmitting some large multiple claims on a 
quarterly basis also skews the data. 
Figure 7 clearly shows the increase of multiples since 2008/09; with many 
cases being ‘stayed’ and remaining outstanding in contrast to the disposal 
of single claims. The decrease in the last three quarters is due to the 
disposal of a large number of airline multiple claims.  
Figure 7: Index of ET single and multiple claims outstanding 
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14 2014/15
Index of caseload outstanding
Multiples
Singles
Baseline: 2008/09 Q1
 
 
 
15

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
4. Timeliness  
This section provides information about the operation of tribunals to assist 
users to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of public services. The 
timeliness measures generally examine the process from receipt to the 
point at which the appellant is notified of the outcome of the hearing (or 
when HMCTS are notified of a settlement, withdrawal or strike out). When 
examining the measures, a number of points should be noted: 
 
The clearance times (expressed in weeks or years) are highly 
dependent upon the processes that take place within a tribunal and 
the type and complexity of a case. In some instances, appeals can 
be stayed because a judgement is awaited from another body (for 
example European Courts), or may be legally complex. 
 
The measures cannot be directly compared between one Tribunal 
and another because of the different processes and very diverse 
nature and requirements of individual jurisdictions. Thus, it is better 
to compare a specific Tribunal over time.  
The information provided is based on the age at which cases were 
cleared.  
Summary of Timeliness Measures (Tables 4.1 – 4.3) 
The measures examine the age of a case when it is cleared or disposed of 
and gives the point at which 25%, 50% (the median), and 75% of cases 
were cleared, along with the average (mean). For example, for the SSCS 
tribunal, 75% of cases that were cleared in July to September 2014 were 
aged 36 weeks or less. 
Figure 8: Cumulative percentage of clearances in July to September 
2014, by age of case at clearance 
Tribunal 
25% point 
50% point 
75% point
Average 
(mean)
First Tier 
Immigration and 
Asylum  
13 weeks or 
less
28 weeks or 
less
40 weeks or 
less
30 weeks
Employment 
(single) 
18 weeks or 
less
27 weeks or 
less
42 weeks or 
less
39 weeks
Employment 
(multiple) 
1-2 years or 
less
3-4 years or 
less
5 years and 
over
215 weeks
SSCS (all) 
10 weeks or 
less
18 weeks or 
less
36 weeks or 
less
28 weeks
 
16

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Employment Tribunals  
For Employment Tribunals, the timescale recorded is from the date the 
claim was accepted by the tribunal to when details of the final judgement 
are given. The distribution for all ET cases is heavily influenced by the age 
of multiple cases (which can be stayed or await decisions from Higher 
Courts). The mean age of a single claim at disposal was 39 weeks, 
whereas this was 215 weeks for multiple claims. Overall the mean age 
was 167 weeks, up from 114 weeks in July to September 2013.  
Clearances for Employment Tribunals were also examined by broad 
jurisdictional group. The results for July to September 2014 showed that 
Equal Pay cases had an average of just under five years (257 weeks), 
while the ‘other’ category had the shortest average clearance time of 38 
weeks. Unauthorised Deductions (Wages Act) had the largest increase 
compared to the previous year, with an average of over 3 years (181 
weeks), an increase of 103 weeks compared to July to September 2013.   
First- tier Immigration and Asylum 
The time is recorded from receipt by the tribunal to the time that a decision 
was notified to the appellant. The mean age of a case at disposal was 30 
weeks in July to September 2014, 5 weeks longer than the same period 
last year, and mainly due to the large increase in Managed Migration 
cases during 2013/14.  
Variations in clearance times between case types are due to different 
processing timescales which apply to each of the Immigration and Asylum 
jurisdictions. For example in July to September 2014, three quarters of 
Asylum cases were completed in 12 weeks or less, whereas Entry 
Clearance Officer appeals were completed in 1-2 years. Figure 9 shows 
the distribution of timeliness by jurisdiction. Timeliness will also vary 
according to disposal method e.g. an appeal struck-out for non-payment 
will be disposed far quicker than a case determined at hearing. 
 
17

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Figure 9: Timeliness of First- tier Immigration and Asylum Tribunals, 
July to September 2014 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12+
Age of case (months)
Percentage of cases cleared
Asylum
Managed 
Migration
Entry 
Clearance
Family 
Visit 
Visas
                                           
 
Social Security and Child Support 
For SSCS, the time is recorded from receipt by the tribunal to the time that 
a decision was notified to the appellant. 
Of those cases disposed of by SSCS in July to September 2014, the mean 
age of a case at disposal was 28 weeks, 9 weeks longer than July to 
September 2013. 
From April 2013, DWP began to introduce changes which were part of the 
Welfare Reform Act 2012. There were three changes:  
 
DWP will reconsider all decisions before an appeal (known as 
mandatory reconsideration);  
 
appeals must be sent directly to HMCTS (known as direct 
lodgement);  
 
there are time limits for DWP to return responses to HMCTS12.  
DWP introduced all three changes for Personal Independence Payment 
and Universal Credit in April 2013. On 28 October 2013, they introduced 
mandatory reconsideration, direct lodgement and time limits for all other 
DWP benefits and child maintenance cases. Direct lodgement also applies 
to appeals against decisions made by HMRC after 1 April 2014.  
 
 
12 Introduced October 2014 
 
18

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Direct lodgement means that up to 28 days (42 days in child maintenance 
cases) is now included in the HMCTS processing time, as appeal 
responses now need to be requested from DWP, rather than timeliness 
being counted from receipt of the response. Therefore current timeliness 
measures are not directly comparable with timeliness before the changes 
were implemented. 
 
The composition of the Tribunal panel varies for each benefit and there 
are some differences in length of clearance time for each type of appeal. 
Those appeals which can be heard by a Judge sitting alone (such as 
appeals against decisions on Job Seekers’ Allowance) take less time to 
clear than appeals where a panel including specialist Medical, Financial or 
Disability panel members is required (see Figure 10).  
Figure 10: Timeliness of Social Security Tribunals, July to September 
2014 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12+
Age of case (months)
Percentage of cases cleared
Judge only
Judge, 
MM, SPD
Judge and 
SMM
Judge 
and MM
 
 
 
19

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
 5. Special Educational Needs and Disability 
(SEND), England 
This section focuses on Special Educational Needs and Disability cases. 
Data is presented in academic years (1 September to 31 August). As 
such, figures presented here differ from the information in the other 
tribunals’ tables. This information is published on an annual basis each 
year in December.  
 The chapter is divided into two sections;  
1. Special Educational Needs  
2. Disability Discrimination claims  
 
The first-tier special educational needs and disability (SEND) jurisdiction 
hears appeals against the decision of local authorities in England relating 
to statements of Special Educational Needs. It also hears disability 
discrimination claims against schools. 
This chapter focuses on information relating to the appeals and decisions 
in relation to Special Educational Needs, broken down by grounds for 
appeal, outcomes and ethnicity of the child involved and local authority 
information. There is also information on Disability Discrimination Claims, 
broken down by grounds for appeal, outcomes and nature of the appeal.  
For further information on children with special educational needs, please 
see the publication by the Department for Education below:  
www.gov.uk/government/publications/children-with-special-educational-
needs-an-analysis-2013 
 
20

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Special Educational Needs (SEN) 
The First-tier special educational needs and disability (SEND) jurisdiction 
hears appeals against decisions of local authorities in England relating to 
statements of Special Educational Needs.  
Pupils with Special Educational Needs are currently13 classified into three 
distinct levels of provision for need: School Action, School Action Plus or 
with statements of special educational needs: 
• School Action – where extra or different help is given from that provided 
as part of the school’s usual curriculum. 
• School Action Plus – where the class teacher and the school special 
educational needs coordinator14 receive advice or support from outside 
specialists (a specialist teacher, an educational psychologist, a speech or 
language therapist or other health professionals). 
• Statement – a pupil has a statement of special educational needs when a 
formal assessment has been made. A document setting out the child’s 
needs and the extra help they should receive is in place. 
Pupils with Special Educational Needs may need extra help because of 
their type of need. These include: profound and multiple learning difficulty; 
behavioural, emotional and social difficulty; and speech, language and 
communication needs.  
Registered SEN appeals 
In the academic year 2013/14, HMCTS Tribunals recorded 4,069 
registered appeals in relation to SEN, up 13% from last year and is the 
highest since the collection began in 1994/95. In the decade from 1994 to 
2004 there was a steep increase in the number of registered SEN 
appeals, from 1,161 in 1994/9515 to 3,532 in 2002/03. Since then the trend 
has remained relatively stable up until this year.  
                                            
13 Assessments and statements of special educational needs are to be replaced with a 
single assessment process and combined Education, Health and Care plan. The 
proposal is that School Action and School Action Plus will be replaced by a single school-
based special educational needs category. 
14 A special educational needs coordinator (SENCO) is a member of staff at school who 
has responsibility for coordinating special educational need provision within that school. 
15 Earlier data has been taken from historic reports on SEND published by, what is now, 
the Department for Education,  
 
21

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Figure 10: Registered appeals to the SEN Tribunal, September 1994 
to August 2014 
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
1994-1995
1995-1996
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
Registered Appeals
 
 
What has driven this? 
There are a number of factors that could have contributed to the rise in 
SEND appeals between 1994 and 2014. These include;  
 
Greater understanding of special educational needs 
 
More provision of services 
 
Parents more willing to challenge local authorities  
 
Stronger push to keep children with special educational needs in 
stage / mainstream schools.  
Registered appeals by type (Table 2) 
In 2013/14, the most common types of appeal were ‘against refusal to 
assess’ and “against contents of the statement parts 2, 3 and 4”, 
accounting for 40% and 23% of all appeals respectively. “Refusal to 
Assess” means the local authority refused to have a child assessed for 
special educational needs whilst “against contents of the statement parts 
2, 3 and 4” is where an appeal has been made against either the 
description, educational provisions required and/or type of school/school 
name on a statement that has been previously made about a child’s 
 
22

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
special educational needs. These have historically been the most common 
categories.  
Registered appeals by nature of special educational need (Table 3) 
There are a number of different grounds for bringing an appeal under 
special educational needs. In 2013/14, the most common ground for 
appeal was Autistic Spectrum Disorder, accounting for 40% of appeals. 
This category has increased over time, and only accounted for 13% of 
appeals in 1998/99 and has shown a steady increase since 2000/01. This 
change may be due to more awareness of this issue.  
Ethnicity of children involved in special educational tribunals (Table 
4) 
In around 60% of SEND appeals, the child involved was from a white 
ethnic background16. In a further 27% of cases, the ethnicity of the child 
was not reported. In 8% of cases, the child was classed being from a 
Black or Asian background.  
Local Authority Breakdowns (Tables 6 and 7) 
SEND appeals can be broken down to local authority in England, however 
due to the differences in sizes in local authorities a rate of appeals per 
10,000 school children is calculated. This is highest in the Inner London 
region with 7.6 appeals per 10,000, whilst the highest number of appeals 
in a local authority is Sutton with 14.5 appeals per 10,000 school children. 
Although the rate controls for the number of children in the area it does not 
control for other factors within local authorities.  
Outcomes of SEN appeals (Tables 8 and 9) 
In 2013/14, HMCTS Tribunals recorded 3,717 outcomes in relation to 
SEN, this is broadly in line with the previous years. Historically, two sharp 
increases have been observed: one from 2002/03 (1,208) to 2003/04 
(3,404) and one from 2009/10 (2,933) to 2010/11 (3,867). 
Outcomes of Special Educational Needs appeals (Tables 8, 9 and 10) 
In 2013/14, only 21% of cases were decided by a tribunal which is 3 
percentage points lower than last year. The remaining 79% of cases were 
withdrawn or conceded. These proportions vary by the nature of the 
                                            
16 Ethnicity is self reported and therefore these figures should be viewed with caution as a 
large proportion of appellants did not complete or disclose their ethnic background  
 
23

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
appeal. Of the cases decided, 83% were decided in favour of the 
appellant.  
Disability Discrimination Claims (Tables 10 to 13) 
Disability discrimination claims relate to appeals against a school or 
academy in England. Schools or academies must not discriminate against 
a pupil because of disability17 in relation to admissions, the provision of 
education and access to any benefit, facility or service; or exclusions. It is 
also unlawful for a school to harass or victimise an applicant or pupil 
because of disability. 
Disability discrimination may be: 
• discrimination arising from disability; 
• failure to provide a reasonable adjustment for a disabled child; 
• direct discrimination; 
• indirect discrimination; 
• harassment; or 
• victimisation. 
Received and Registered Disability Discrimination appeals 
In 2013/14, there were 126 registered appeals in relation to disability 
discrimination. Of these, 55% were decided by the SEND tribunal.  
Most of the appeals are uncategorised in their nature.  
 
 
 
 
 
                                            
17 The Equality Act 2010 defines a disability as a physical or mental impairment which 
has a substantial (more than minor or trivial) and long-term adverse effect (to last for at 
least a year or for the rest of their life) on the disabled person’s ability to carry out normal 
day-to-day activities. 
 
24

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
6. Gender Recognition Certificate Statistics 
The Gender Recognition Panel (GRP) was established under the Gender 
Recognition Act 2004 (GRA), which enables transsexual people to change 
their gender legally and gain the rights and responsibilities of their 
acquired gender. All applications are determined by the Panel and 
applicants who meet the GRA’s requirements are granted a Gender 
Recognition Certificate.  
The GRP is part of Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) 
and comprises of legal and medical members, supported by an 
administrative team. The panel sit in private and consider the documentary 
evidence supplied by the applicant in support of their application to have 
their gender recognised.  
For background information on the Gender Recognition process please 
refer to ‘A Guide to Court and Administrative Justice Statistics’, which is 
available at: 
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-court-and-
administrative-justice-statistics 
 
 
Applications for Gender Recognition Certificates 
A total of 76 applications were received by the Gender Recognition Panel 
(GRP) in July to September 2014 (see Tables 5.1 and 5.2). Overall, the 
number of applications has followed a broadly flat trend over the past five 
years (see Figure 11). 
Of the 76 applications received in the quarter, none were ‘overseas track’ 
applications. 
 
25

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Figure 11: Applications received by the Gender Recognition Panel, 
July 2009 to September 2014 
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/ 15
Quarters (Financial year)
Number of applications
 
At the end of September 2014, a total of 82 applications were in progress 
awaiting final resolution, some of which are from earlier periods. This was 
an increase of 78% compared to the same period last year, and 37% more 
than the number pending at the end of the previous quarter. 
Initial outcome of applications (Table 5.1) 
A total of 54 applications were dealt with by the GRP during the period 
July to September 2014, whereby a decision had been taken to grant 
either a full Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), an Interim Certificate or 
the applicant was either refused or withdrew their application 
Of the applications dealt with in July to September 2014, a full GRC was 
granted in 43 cases (80% of the total, see Figure 12). In these cases the 
person was judged by the GRP to have satisfied the criteria for legal 
recognition in their acquired gender. The proportion of applications dealt 
with where a full GRC was granted has been largely stable over the last 
five years. Since inception of the GRP in July 2005, a total of 3,763 full 
GRCs have been granted. 
There were three cases where an interim GRC was granted in July to 
September 2014, which meant that the application was successful but the 
applicant was married or in a civil partnership at the time. 
A further two applications were withdrawn during July to September 2014, 
while six applications were either refused or no fee was paid. 
 
26

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Figure 12: Proportion of applications dealt with where a full Gender 
Recognition Certificate was granted, July 2009 to September 2014 
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/ 15
Quarters (Financial year)
% granted
 
Gender Recognition Certificates granted – demographic statistics 
(Table 5.4) 
Of the 43 full Gender Recognition Certificates granted in July to 
September 2014, 23 (53%) were granted to individuals who were 
registered male at birth (who thus legally became female as a result). The 
remaining 20 (47%) were granted to individuals who were registered 
female at birth. 
The proportion of certificates granted to individuals who were registered 
female at birth has generally increased over the last two years (see Figure 
12). In July to September 2014, the proportion who were registered female 
at birth was the highest ever, at 47%. In the same period of the previous 
year this was at 31%. 
 
 
27

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Figure 13: Full Gender Recognition Certificates granted, July 2009 to 
September 2014, by gender 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
2009/10 Q2
2009/10 Q3
2009/10 Q4
2010/11 Q1
2010/11 Q2
2010/11 Q3
2010/11 Q4
2011/12 Q1
2011/12 Q2
2011/12 Q3
2011/12 Q4
2012/13 Q1
2012/13 Q2
2012/13 Q3
2012/13 Q4
2013/14 Q1
2013/14 Q2
2013/14 Q3
2013/14 Q4
2014/15 Q1
2014/15 Q2
Proportion of full GRCs issued
% Male to female
% Female to male
 
Full Gender Recognition Certificates were granted to applicants of a range 
of ages. The highest number of certificates was granted to applicants born 
between the years 1980-1989 (see Figure 14). 
Figure 14: Full Gender Recognition Certificates granted between July 
and September 2014, by year of birth 
 
 
 
28

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Conversion of Interim to Full Gender Recognition 
Certificates 
This analysis looks at the conversion of interim Gender Recognition 
Certificates to full Gender Recognition Certificates. The timeliness figures 
are based on cases where full details of the dates are available. 
Between 1 July 2005 and 30 September 2014 there were 175 interim 
certificates issued by the Gender Recognition Panel (see Table 5.5). As of 
30 September 2014, 70% of these had been converted to a full Gender 
Recognition Certificate. Please note this proportion may change in 
subsequent periods as more data become available. 
For those people who converted interim certificates to full certificates, the 
majority (56%) of people converted within 30 weeks. 
Figure 15: Time for conversion from interim to full Gender 
Recognition Certificates between 1 July 2005 and 30 September 2014 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Less than 15 weeks
15-30 weeks
31-45 weeks
over 45 weeks
Proportion of interims converted
 
 
 
 
29

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Annex A: Data quality and sources 
Information presented in this report is management information drawn 
from a number of different administrative sources. Although care is taken 
when processing and analysing the data, the details are subject to 
inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system and it is the best 
data that is available at the time of publication. HMCTS is examining the 
quality of management information. Thus, it is possible that some revisions 
may be issued in future publications. 
The statistics are based on case management systems where a number of 
processes are recorded throughout the life of an appeal. In some 
instances, a case can re-enter the process or have a number of outcomes, 
meaning that there is not necessarily one receipt or one disposal per case. 
Thus, care should be taken when comparing receipts and disposals. 
Further information on HMCTS and other court statistics, including 
information on the data sources and terminology used in this report can be 
found in A Guide to Court and Administrative Justice Statistics:  
www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-court-and-administrative-
justice-statistics  
Differences with Home Office statistics 
Asylum appeals data published by Home Office Migration Statistics are 
sourced from the Home Office Case Information Database (CID) and 
relate to main asylum applicants at the First-tier Tribunal Immigration and 
Asylum Chamber. Records on the database are updated from record-level 
data provided by HMCTS, who produce similar statistics for main 
appellants. This procedure provides consistent data across all datasets 
relating to asylum published in the release Immigration Statistics, but it is 
different from those published by The Ministry of Justice.  
The Ministry of Justice published statistics provide counts of principal 
appellants sourced from the HMCTS database. Within these statistics 
there tend to be higher numbers of principal appellants than main asylum 
applicant appeals because:  
1)     HMCTS has a wider definition of asylum appeals, including some 
human rights cases and appeals on extensions of asylum, humanitarian 
protection and discretionary leave; and  
2)     Principal appellants include some individuals classed as dependants 
by the Home Office.  
 
 
 
 
30

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
The Home Office statistics on immigration and asylum appeals at First-tier 
Tribunal and subsequent stages are available from: 
www.gov.uk/government/collections/immigration-statistics-quarterly-
release  
Revisions 
From 2014, new information has been included on the Upper Tribunal 
Immigration and Asylum Chamber; as such all relevant totals have been 
revised accordingly. This is usually around 2,000 receipts and disposals 
per quarter, or one per cent of the total tribunals’ workload. Totals have 
been revised back to 2010/11 when the UTIAC was created.  
Historic receipt and disposal information for First-tier Immigration and 
Asylum has been revised to include appeals dismissed or withdrawn at the 
Preliminary Issue stage. This is where an appeal has been submitted 
outside the prescribed time limit or may be otherwise invalid. Such cases 
will only proceed to the appeal stage if decided by a Judge. A new 
disposal category of “Invalid/Out of Time” has been introduced to show 
appeals dismissed at the Preliminary Issue stage. Cases withdrawn at this 
stage are included in the “Withdrawn” category. 
In 2012/13, a new outcome category was introduced for Immigration and 
Asylum disposals of “Struck Out for Non-Payment”. This is as a result of 
the introduction of fees for certain Immigration and Asylum appeals 
introduced in 2011. Some of the historic disposal and outcome data has 
been revised following this. 
 
Explanatory Notes 
Notation 
The following symbols have been used throughout the tables in this 
bulletin:  
..    
= Not applicable 
 ~ 
= Figures too small to give meaningful calculations 
0   
= Nil 
(r)  
= Revised data 
Spreadsheet files of the tables contained in this document are also 
available to download along with csv files of historic information.  
 
 
31

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Annex B: Tribunal and Jurisdiction List 
In the accompany tables a full list of Tribunals and Jurisdictions is given 
(Table B.1), alongside the date they were created or, if applicable, what 
they were formally known as and the date in which they changed.
 
32

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Annex C: Monthly and Regional Employment 
Tribunal Receipts 
This information is additional management information that has been 
drawn from a live administrative system managed by HMCTS. The data 
presented in this report include historic information at the regional level, 
with a monthly breakdown. This information was a bespoke extraction for 
the purpose of this report.  
Trend in Employment Tribunal Receipts  
In 2012/13, the Employment Tribunal received on average 48,000 new 
claims per quarter. Figures for July to September 2014 show there were 
13,612 new claims.  
Figure 1: Employment Tribunal Receipts (quarterly), April 2008 to 
September 2014 
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
2010/11 
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Number of receipts (thousands)
Employment
All Tribunals
 
This Annex also includes a monthly breakdown from January 2012 to 
September 2014 (Figure 2). This shows that the data are volatile and can 
change dramatically from month to month. Please note these data include 
both single and multiple claims.  
Following the introduction of fees on 29 July 2013, there are 14 months of 
data available post fees (August 2013 to September 2014). Users are 
advised that a claim is not considered as accepted until the fee is paid, or 
remission granted, which may increase the time it takes to enter cases 
onto the system.  
 
33

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Figure 2: Employment Tribunal Receipts (monthly, January 2012 to 
September 2014) 
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August 
September
2012
2013
2014
Total ET receipts
 
Single and multiple claims 
Employment Tribunal receipts can be broken down into single and multiple 
claims. Figure 2 above shows the total number of receipts, but this is not 
the same as the number of cases (where a number of multiple receipts 
can be counted as one case as they are bought against one employer18 
by a number of people).  
 
1. Single cases 
A single case and single claim is the same thing, they involve one 
individual bringing a claim against an employer. In effect the alignment of 
case to claims is 1:1. Data shows that the number of single cases was 
volatile from April to October 2012, after October 2012 they began to 
gradually decrease from nearly 5,000 in October 2012 to just under 4,000 
in June 2013. The number rose to just over 6,500 in July 2013, possibly as 
more claims were submitted prior to the introduction of fees. The number 
of single cases then fell sharply to 1,000 cases in September 2013, and 
averaged around 1,600 cases between October 2013 and June 2014.  
 
 
 
                                            
18 Occasionally, more than one employer can be involved. See footnote 1, above. 
 
34

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
2. Multiple claims cases 
Multiple claims that are grouped, processed and managed together are 
called, collectively, a multiple claims case. Within a multiple claims case 
there will be two or more claims presented by individuals against a 
common employer (or, in some circumstances, employers). The alignment 
of case to claims is one to many, where a multiple claims case could 
range from two individual claims to over 100, or even 1,000. Typically 
employment receipts show the number of individual claims, not cases, 
which can result in a lot of volatility (see Figure 2).  
When looking at the number of multiple claims cases, regardless of the 
number of individuals involved, there is a broadly flat trend from April 2012 
to June 2013. There is an increase in multiple claims cases for July 2013, 
again possibly due to people wishing to submit cases before the 
introduction of fees. There is then a decline in cases in August and 
September 2013 and an average of 150 cases per month since then (see 
Figure 3). 
Figure 3: Single and multiple claims cases (January 2012 to 
September 2014) 
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August 
September
2012
2013
2014
Total ET Reciepts
Single cases
Multiple cases
 
As the number of multiple claims cases has been broadly flat for a number 
of months the volatility seen in the monthly data must be due to the 
number of people (or claims) involved in each multiple claims case. The 
volatility seen in the monthly data is due to the variation in the number of 
individuals involved in multiple claims cases.  
 
35

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Users are advised that these figures need to be treated with extreme 
caution for two reasons: 
1. All figures after January 2012 have been re-extracted from the 
administrative data system for this publication. As such these 
figures have not been through the same Quality Assurance process 
as the Official Tribunals Statistics publication. 
2. Under the business processes to facilitate fee-charging, a claim is 
not entered onto the internal case management system from which 
statistical data are extracted until the relevant fee is paid or 
remission application granted. This means there may be a number 
of claims presented post July 2013, but formally accepted at a later 
stage (for example after a remission application is granted).   
Employment Tribunals claims by region 
Claims can be submitted online or to an Employment Tribunal Office. 
Once a claim is received and acknowledged by HMCTS, it is recorded on 
the case management system and case managed through, ultimately, to 
disposal (for example, by listing for a hearing before the tribunal). The 
geographical data below relates to where the case was submitted and 
heard by the Tribunal panel, in most cases this will be the same location 
as the employer or the party that bought the claim.  
Figure 4: Claims by region (September 2013 to September 2014) 
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July 
August
September
2013
2014
Scotland
North East
North West
Midlands
London
South East
South West
Wales
 
36

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Data Quality and Limitations 
There are a number of issues for users to be aware of when considering 
these data.  
 
The monthly data for employment tribunal receipts shows a great 
deal of volatility. As such the figures should be treated with caution. 
Early analysis suggests this volatility is driven by the number of 
individual people involved in multiple claims cases.  
 
The monthly and regional data have been extracted specifically to 
produce Annex C; as such it is provisional and subject to revisions. 
 
The data have been extracted from a live administrative database in 
November 2014, and as such historic monthly data may aggregate 
to different figures to those already published. This will be 
reconciles at a later date.  
 
The introduction of fees may have resulted in a longer time lag for 
claims to be entered onto HMCTS’ case management system, 
ETHOS. This is because claims are now not entered onto ETHOS 
until the fee has been paid or a remission has been granted. This 
means that data are likely to be revised upward in subsequent 
months.  
 
Figures may vary from previously published figures for a number of 
reasons, including: 
o revision to the administrative system, including claims being 
entered onto the system outside of the month they were 
lodged; 
o submission or re-submission of large numbers of multiple 
claims; 
o multiple claims disbanding and being re-submitted as single 
claims or vice-versa;  
o claims being re-submitted with a different jurisdictional 
breakdown and, 
o Additional information received from the tribunals that had 
not been entered onto the ICT system at the time of 
extraction.  
 
The monthly and regional breakdowns in this report are not routine 
and have been produced specifically for this publication.  
 
 
 
 
37

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Annex D: Accompanying Tables and files 
The following supplementary tables and CSV datasets are available 
alongside this publication, allowing users to analyse the data themselves.  
Main Tables  
Summary 
S.1 
Annual total number of receipts, disposals and caseload 
outstanding by jurisdiction, 2007/08 to 2013/14  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Receipts 
 
 
 
 
1.1 
Annual and quarterly total number of tribunal receipts by 
jurisdiction, 2007/08 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.2 
Employment Tribunal - Total number of receipts by jurisdiction, 
2007/08 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.3 
Immigration and Asylum First Tier Tribunal - Total number of 
receipts by case type, 2007/08 to Q2 2014/15  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.4 
Social Security and Child Support - Total number of receipts by 
benefit type, 2009/10 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Disposals 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.1 
Annual and quarterly total number of tribunals disposals by 
jurisdiction, 2007/08 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.2 
Employment Tribunal - Total number of disposals by jurisdiction, 
2007/08 to Q2 2014/15  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.3 
Employment Tribunal - Percentage of disposals by outcome and 
jurisdiction, 2007/08 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.4 
Immigration and Asylum First Tier Tribunal - Number of appeals 
disposed by category and by case type, 2007/08 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.5 
Immigration and Asylum First Tier Tribunal - Number of appeals 
determined at hearing or on paper, by outcome category and case 
type, 2007/08 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.6 
Social Security and Child Support - Number of disposals by 
category and by benefit type, 2009/10 to Q2 2014/15  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.7 
Social Security and Child Support - Number of disposals cleared at 
hearing by outcomes and benefit type, 2007/08 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
38

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Caseload outstanding 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.1 
Annual and quarterly total number of tribunals’ caseload 
outstanding by jurisdiction, 2007/08 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Timeliness  
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.1 
Cumulative percentage of clearances that took place in 2012/13 
and 2013/14, by age of case at clearance 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.2 
Percentage of clearances that took place in July to September 
2014, by age of case at clearance 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.3 
Percentage of clearances that took place in July to September 
2014, by age of case at clearance by Jurisdiction 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Gender Recognition 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.1 
Applications received and dealt with by the Gender Recognition 
Panel, by outcome, since inception  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.2 
Applications received by the Gender Recognition Panel, by type of 
Track, Q1 2009/10 to Q2 2014/15  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.3 
Applications dealt with by the Gender Recognition Panel, by type of 
track and outcome, Q1 2009/10 to Q2 2014/15  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.4 
Gender at birth and year of birth for full Gender Recognition 
Certificates granted, Q2 2009/10 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.5 
Interim certificates converted to full certificates, by time taken, Q1 
2005/06 to Q2 2014/15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Annex B 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
B.1 
Change of Names of Tribunals 
 
Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal Tables 
SEND.1 
Special Educational Need appeals received and registered, 
1994/95 to 2013/14 
SEND.2 
Special Educational Need registered appeals by type, 
1998/99 to 2013/14 
SEND.3 
Appeals registered by nature of Special Educational Need 
(SEN), 1998/99 to 2013/14 
 
39

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
SEND.4 
Special Educational Need appeals by child's ethnic origin, 
1998/99 to 2013/14 
SEND.5 
Special Educational Need appeals registered per local 
authority in England, 2007/08 to 2013/14 
SEND.6 
Special Educational Need appeals registered per 10,000 
school age population by local authority, 2012/13 to 2013/14 
SEND.7 
Decisions by Special Educational Need (SEN), 2010/11 to `
 
2013/14 
SEND.8 
Special Educational Need outcomes of appeals; decided, 
withdrawn, conceded, 1997/98 to 2013/14 
SEND.9 
Outcomes by Special Educational Need (SEN) category, 
2010/11 to 2013/14 
SEND.10 
Disability Discrimination Cases: Appeals received and 
registered, 2003/04 to 2013/14 
SEND.11 
Disability registered appeals by type, 2003/04 to 2013/14 
SEND.12 
Disability appeals registered by nature of disability, 2003/04 
to 2013/14 
SEND.13 
Disability outcomes of claims by type, 2003/04 to 2013/14 
 
 
Management Information on Employment Tribunal Receipts (Annex 
C) Tables 
Table C.1 
Total Number of Employment Tribunal Receipts by Single 
and Multiple cases, January 2012 to September 2014 
Table C.2 
Total Number of Employment Tribunal Receipts by 
Jurisdiction, January 2012 to September 2014 
Table C.3 
Total Number of Employment Tribunal Receipts by Region, 
January 2012 to September 2014 
Table C.4 
Total Number of Employment Tribunal Receipts by 
Jurisdiction and by Region, January 2013 to September 
2014  
 
 
40

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Annex E: Policy Changes 
Employment Tribunals 
Fees for Employment Tribunals and the Employment Appeals Tribunal 
were introduced for claims received on or after 29 July 2013, alongside 
wider reform of procedural rules (following the Underhill Review of 
Employment Tribunal Rules). 
For background information on the reforms please see: 
www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/employment 
www.gov.uk/government/publications/employment-tribunal-receipt-
statistics-management-information-july-to-september-2013  
www.gov.uk/government/consultations/employment-tribunal-rules-review-
by-mr-justice-underhill  
 
On 6 April 2014, the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) 
introduced Early Conciliation19. This means that anybody wishing to make 
an Employment Tribunal Claim must notify ACAS first and be offered the 
chance to settle their dispute without going to court. A report on the first 
quarter of the service can be found here:  
http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4960  
 
Social Security and Child Support 
From April 2013, DWP began to introduce changes which were part of the 
Welfare Reform Act 2012. There were three main changes:  
 
DWP will reconsider all decisions before an appeal can be lodged 
(known as mandatory reconsideration);  
 
appeals must be sent directly to HMCTS (known as direct 
lodgement);  
 
there are time limits for DWP to return its responses to HMCTS20.  
These changes were introduced for Personal Independence Payment 
(PIP)21  and Universal Credit (UC)22 in April 2013. On 28 October 2013 
                                            
19 http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4028  
20 Introduced October 2014 
21 Personal Independence Payment (New Claim Appeals) which replaces Disability Living 
Allowance was introduced on 8 April 2013. 
22 Universal Credit was introduced on 29 April 2013 in selected areas. It will gradually be 
rolled out to the rest of Great Britain. It replaces income-based JSA, income-related ESA, 
Income Support, Working Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, Housing Benefit.  
 
41

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
these were extended to all other DWP-administered benefits and child 
maintenance cases, and from April 2014 to appeals made against HMRC 
decisions about tax credits. Robust data is not yet available to assess the 
impact of these changes on tribunal receipts. DWP are looking to publish 
Mandatory Reconsiderations data when they judge it is of suitable quality 
to be published as Official Statistics. 
For further information, see: 
www.gov.uk/government/publications/appeals-process-changes-for-dwp-
benefits-and-child-maintenance     
 
 
 
42

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
Annex F: Useful Publications 
 
For historic publications of all Tribunals Statistics please see: 
www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice/series/tribunals-
statistics  
 
For more information on the context for this publication please see:  
www.justice.gov.uk/about/hmcts/tribunals  
A diagram showing the structure of the tribunal system can be found here: 
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/the-justice-system/court-
structure/  
 
For information on Tribunal judgements please see:  
www.bailii.org/databases.html#uk  
 
Non-MoJ Scotland Tribunals 
For information on non-MoJ Mental Health Tribunals Scotland please see: 
www.mhtscotland.gov.uk/mhts/Annual_Reports/Annual_Reports_main  
 
For Additional Support Needs Tribunals in Scotland please see: 
www.asntscotland.gov.uk/asnts/181.25.141.html 
 
Information on the Private Rented Housing Panel (prhp), which help 
Scottish tenants and landlords resolve their differences can be found at 
the following link: 
www.prhpscotland.gov.uk/prhp/128.html  
Non-MoJ Northern Ireland Tribunals  
For information on Tribunals in Northern Ireland not covered by this report 
please see the following publications:  
www.courtsni.gov.uk/en-
GB/Services/Statistics%20and%20Research/Pages/default.aspx 
 
Employment Tribunals 
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) have recently 
published a study on claimants who had been successful at the 
employment tribunal and were awarded money:  
www.gov.uk/government/publications/payment-of-employment-tribunal-
awards  
 
 
43

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
The sixth BIS Survey of Employment Tribunal Applicants can be found 
here: 
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/employment-tribunal-
applications-2013-survey-findings 
 
Social Security and Child Support 
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have carried out analysis 
on the overturn rates for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) by 
region and health condition, for further information see: 
www.gov.uk/government/publications/employment-and-support-allowance-
-6 
Special Educational Needs and Disability 
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130128112038/http://www.jus
tice.gov.uk/publications/corporate-reports/tribunals/send 
www.gov.uk/government/publications/children-with-special-educational-
needs-an-analysis-2013 
 
 
 
 
44

Tribunals Statistics Quarterly July to September 2014 
 
45
Contacts 
Press enquiries on the contents of this bulletin should be directed to the 
MoJ or HMCTS press offices: 
Christian Cubitt 
Tel: xx-xxxx-xxxx 
Email: xxx@xxx.xx  
Mark Kram 
Tel: xx-xxxx-xxxx 
Email: xxx@xxx.xx 
 
Queries regarding the work of the Gender Recognition Panel should be 
directed to: 
Gender Recognition Panel  
PO Box 9300 
Leicester 
LE1 8DJ 
Tel: xx-xxxx-xxxx 
Email: xxx@xxx.xx 
 
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice 
Statistics Analytical Services division of the MoJ: 
Tara Rose 
Ministry of Justice 
102 Petty France 
London 
SW1H 9AJ 
Tel: xx-xxxx-xxxx 
Email: xxx@xxx.xx 
General enquiries about the statistics work of the MoJ can be e-mailed to 
xxx@xxx.xx 
General information about the official statistics system of the UK is 
available from www.statistics.gov.uk