Public consultation is now open on the replacement of multiple existing specialist tribunals with a single body for hearing appeals against government decisions.
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal Bill, 2025, sponsored by the Portfolio of Legal Affairs, proposes establishing a centralised tribunal.
If approved, it will hear appeals ranging from planning decisions to licensing matters, streamlining what is currently handled by various separate tribunals.
The tribunal would only have jurisdiction to hear appeals against decisions specifically designated as appealable in relevant legislation, not all government administrative decisions.
Key provisions ensure the tribunal’s independence, stating it “is not subject to the direction or control of any person or authority in exercising its jurisdiction”.
Under the proposed structure, the tribunal would consist of a president and deputy president who must be qualified for appointment as Grand Court judges, at least two legal members with five years of post-qualification experience, and ordinary members with relevant expertise in non-legal fields.
All members would be appointed by the governor.
The legislation would allow affected people to appeal administrative decisions on the grounds that they are erroneous in law, unreasonable or contrary to principles of natural justice.
Appeals would need to begin within 28 days of notification, though the president could extend this by up to seven days.
The tribunal’s objectives include ensuring appeals are processed quickly with minimal cost, using straightforward language and procedures, and acting with little formality and technicality to promote access to justice.
After hearing an appeal, the tribunal could confirm, vary or set aside the original decision, and either substitute its own decision or send the matter back to the original decision maker with recommendations.
Tribunal decisions could only be appealed to the Grand Court on questions of law, with leave from the court required.
The proposed legislation includes strong procedural safeguards, requiring decision makers to provide written notice of appealable decisions and inform affected persons of their right to appeal.
Decision makers would also need to provide written statements of reasons within 28 days if requested.
Unlike traditional court proceedings, the tribunal would not be bound by rules of evidence and could inform itself in any way it considers appropriate.
Parties would generally bear their own costs, though the tribunal could make costs orders in cases of unreasonable delay or obstruction.
The president would have administrative responsibility for the tribunal’s operations and could establish divisions to hear different classes of matters.
Specialist assessors could be appointed to provide technical advice on specific appeals.
Proceedings would generally be open to the public, though the tribunal could order private hearings or restrict publication where necessary in the interests of justice or due to confidential evidence.
The bill requires the Rules Committee of the Grand Court to establish procedural rules, while the president could issue practice directions for the tribunal’s operation.
An annual report on the tribunal’s administration and operation would need to be submitted to the attorney general and tabled in parliament.
The tribunal’s establishment date would be determined by Cabinet order, with provision for different sections to begin on different dates.
In accordance with the constitution, parliament cannot proceed with the bill until 28 days after publication, allowing for public consultation. It was published on 2 October.
During this period, the ministry or portfolio may receive comments from stakeholders and members of the public, which may result in proposed changes to the legislation.
Members of the public can submit comments on the proposed legislation through the Portfolio of Legal Affairs website at www.gov.ky/pola/
