Rising demand has pushed tribunal backlogs to record levels

Tribunals, the part of the justice system where individuals can challenge decisions made by the state (for example, on benefits, support for children with special educational needs, and migration), are facing record-level backlogs. In the first quarter of 2026, nearly 330,000 administrative appeals were open and awaiting resolution, double the level before the COVID-19 pandemic. This increase began in 2021–22 and has been steep and persistent.

These backlogs have built up as the number of new appeals has outpaced the number of cases resolved. Special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and asylum/immigration tribunals, in particular, now receive around two to four times as many appeals as they did only five years ago.This reflects, in large part, more people requesting services or decisions from the state, such as Education, Health and Care Plan assessments from local authorities and asylum decisions from the Home Office, some of which then lead to appeals. In asylum tribunals, the rise in appeals has also been driven by the Home Office working through its own backlog more quickly than in the past, therefore generating more decisions that can be appealed against.

These are among the findings of new research from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, which looks at trends and drivers in tribunal backlogs as part of a new programme of work on the economics of the justice system.

Turning to the detail on tribunals, we find: 

• A simple proxy of tribunal productivity – the number of cases resolved per sitting day – has remained broadly stable during this recent period of pressure. But it remains far lower than in the early 2010s. This suggests that the rise in backlogs since 2021–22 has been mainly driven by a spike in demand, not tribunals becoming less productive. 

• Rising pressure on the tribunal system could have been met through investment in greater capacity. Our analysis indicates that in social security and SEND tribunals, increases in sitting days over the past four years, of around 13% and 21% respectively, could have offset the observed rise in appeals. In asylum and immigration, the increase in demand would have required a much larger expansion, of around 35%.

Luca Rizzotti, Research Economist at IFS and an author of the research, said: 

‘Tribunals are an important part of the justice system, allowing individuals to appeal against decisions made by the state. But they are coming under significant strain, with record-high backlogs that risk undermining their ability to function effectively.

‘There are two main options for the government to reduce tribunal backlogs: reducing the number of appeals that reach tribunals or increasing the number of cases tribunals can resolve. Fewer appeals are desirable if they result from better decision-making by state actors earlier on, so that people receive the benefits, services or status they are entitled to without needing to appeal. But fewer appeals would be concerning if they instead reflect greater obstacles deterring people with legitimate claims. Increasing tribunal capacity, by contrast, may require public investment that is hard to mobilise, but it is less likely to restrict access to justice.’

Rob Street, Director of Justice at the Nuffield Foundation, said:

‘Tribunals were designed to be faster, more accessible and less formal than the civil courts. This analysis shows parts of the system are now under such pressure that this is no longer the case. Beneath the ballooning caseloads and delays are people left in limbo: children out of school for years, disabled people unable to work or access the support they are entitled to, and families seeking safe refuge left uncertain about their future here. With demand unlikely to fall in the short term, active intervention to increase capacity is needed to bring backlogs down and stop the system overheating.’