Adversarialism in the immigration tribunal

The Immigration Tribunal provides an important independent remedy for applicants who wish to challenge decisions made by the Home Office. In terms of its procedure, the Immigration Tribunal is known for employing an approach which is paradigmatically adversarial (Ryder & Hardy 2019).

Through my PhD research, by combining empirical evidence and socio-legal reflections, I have sought to understand 'adversarialism' in the First Tier Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber and in this paper I present some of the findings. By drawing on qualitative research data collected at the field site: the Immigration Tribunal in Glasgow, I consider adversarialism through examining judicial approaches and noting the role of workgroup dynamics.

This paper appraises the extent to which hearings in the Immigration Tribunal adopt an adversarial hearing format. Through examining judicial approaches, I develop a typology for reflecting on differing judicial interventions: 'a ladder of judicial intervention'. The ladder challenges the binary understanding, often depicted in the literature, and shows that the judges adopt a range of context sensitive approaches to hearing. Through examining the existence of and practices of the workgroup (judges, clerks, Home Office representatives and legal representatives) I observed the examples of cooperation and empathetic engagement also operate to challenge the narrative that the tribunal has a purely adversarial approach.