A QUICK POST ABOUT BUNDLES: THIS WAS “ALMOST UNUSABLE”: “THE INDEX MUST IDENTIFY THE DOCUMENTS CONTAINED”

There is an interesting postscript to the judgment of Judge Anthony Snelson in the case of  Soor v Luton Borough Council [2025] UKFTT 259 (GRC). It relates to bundles…

… the bundle produced by the Council (over 600 pages long) was almost unusable.…n particular, to state the obvious, the index must identify the documents contained.”

THE CASE

The judge had been hearing an appeal in relation to the imposition of penalty charges. The appeal was unsuccessful.

THE JUDGE’S COMMENTS ON THE BUNDLE

” I add two points. First, the Council would do well in future cases to be clear on what basis it is revisiting any decision to impose a penalty. The Tribunal should not have been required to analyse the legislation and resort to deeming and inference in order to attach a legal label to the adjustment in question. Any review should be clear and explicitly refer to the provisions engaged. Creation of standard documents should be considered. Second, the bundle produced by the Council (over 600 pages long) was almost unusable. In future, the GRC guidance must be followed. In particular, to state the obvious, the index must identify the documents contained.”

THE GENERAL REGULATORY COUNCIL GUIDANCE ON BUNDLES

The First-tier Tribunal does have a very detailed Bundles Guide – available here. 

This includes detailed information on how the bundle should be prepared and the nature of the index