The Law Reform Commission (“LRC“) has published a consultation paper on reform of non-court adjudicative bodies and appeals to courts as part of its Fifth Programme of Law Reform (the “Consultation Paper“).
The proposals explored in the Consultation Paper are aimed at improving the quality of first-instance decision-making by non-court adjudicative bodies by standardising, simplifying and clarifying procedures, whilst preserving necessary specialist flexibility.
The detailed Consultation Paper can be reviewed here and responses are sought by 23 June 2026. An introductory discussion on the Consultation Paper was held by the LRC on 10 February 2026 and can be viewed here.
Who will this affect?
This will be of interest to public bodies, as well as financial services providers, digital and media services providers, telecommunications providers, employers, landlords, property developers, aviation personnel and service providers, data controllers and processors, as well as regulated professions such as legal and medical practitioners – all of whom regularly deal with public or regulatory bodies who carry out adjudicative functions.
Although no prescriptive list of such bodies is provided in the Consultation Paper, it would include bodies such as:
- Data Protection Commission;
- Coimisiún na Meán;
- Competition and Consumer Protection Commission;
- Commission for Communications Regulation;
- Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman;
- Irish Financial Services Appeal Tribunal;
- Central Bank of Ireland;
- Workplace Relations Commission;
- The Labour Court;
- Tax Appeals Commission;
- Environmental Protection Agency;
- Irish Aviation Authority;
- Residential Tenancies Board; and
- An Coimisiún Pleanála.
Why is the consultation being carried out?
Ireland’s administrative justice system was not designed; it has evolved. Over decades, the Oireachtas created hundreds of different tribunals, boards, and regulatory bodies on an ad hoc basis. This has resulted in a “patchwork” of procedures whereby similar disputes might be handled under completely different rules simply because they fall under different bodies.
The LRC’s Fifth Programme for Law Reform, published in 2019, identified this issue and that it can give rise to inconsistencies in decision-making procedures and practices.
Then came the Supreme Court decision in Zalewski v Workplace Relations Commission[1] in 2021, which found certain aspects the WRC adjudication system to be unconstitutional. The court ruled that when non-court bodies exercise powers that are “judicial in nature,” they must adhere to high standards of constitutional fairness (such as the right to cross-examine and the requirement for hearings to be public).
However, many existing bodies were not set up with these rigorous standards in mind, creating a risk that their decisions could be legally challenged or overturned. Accordingly, this provided further impetus for reform. As a direct response to Zalewski, the Oireachtas enacted the Workplace Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2021, to amend the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and ameliorate processes and procedures of the WRC identified by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional, allowing for public hearings and the publication of party names in decisions of the WRC, as well as making provision for adjudicator officers to take evidence on oath or affirmation.
Certain bodies (including the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, Coimisiún na Meán, the Commission for Communications Regulation and the Central Bank of Ireland) have already refreshed their processes to ensure they are in compliance with Zalewski. The new processes of these bodies may act as “model” processes in any streamlining initiative.
What are the issues currently?
The following specific issues are identified and considered by the LRC:
- establishing universal minimum standards and procedural safeguards to ensure fairness across all non-court adjudicative bodies;
- harmonising the powers of these bodies including regarding case management, investigative reach, evidence handling, sanctions, enforcement, and the awarding of costs;
- enhancing competence, independence, and efficiency through structured recruitment, mandatory training, formal qualifications, and robust accountability mechanisms for members;
- addressing the legal uncertainty that results from the current variety and complexity of appeal processes, including statutory appeals and judicial review and how they interact with each other; and
- addressing the inefficiencies inherent in managing hundreds of separate bodies – each with its own registry, IT system and training budget.
What sorts of reforms are proposed?
The Consultation Paper explores a number of potential options to address these issues, including:
- a framework statute: a primary legislative “toolkit” to guarantee standard minimum powers and fair procedures across the entire adjudicative landscape;
- an Administrative Justice Council: a new, independent statutory body dedicated to oversight and coordination of non-court adjudicative functions in Ireland;
- standardised judicial oversight: a refined legal framework to create a more consistent and coherent system of appellate review to bring greater legal certainty, to include standardisation of appeals and of court rules relating to appeals from adjudicative bodies; and
- a ‘super tribunal’ system: the potential consolidation of various specialised tribunals and non-court adjudicative bodies into a single entity with broad jurisdiction, either as a first-instance body or an overarching appellate tribunal, with a sharing of resources and administrative costs.
In addition to the public bodies that may be affected, businesses operating in Ireland may be particularly interested in the proposals to streamline the standard of review and process for appeals. The proposal to limit the existing general automatic right to appeal from the High Court to the Court of Appeal and the proposal to establish an appellate super tribunal are also likely to be of interest.
Conclusion
The stated objective of the LRC is to standardise, simplify and clarify the decision making processes of public law adjudicative bodies, with the aim of improving the quality of first instance decision-making. However, the Consultation Paper acknowledges that procedural differences between specialist bodies often serve a precise function and care must be taken not to standardise at the expense of losing expertise developed by specialist bodies performing targeted functions.
This consultation provides an opportunity for stakeholders to shape the future of administrative justice in Ireland. In particular, this consultation presents an opportunity for regulated entities to raise their concerns about the fairness of the status quo whereby industry-funded regulators ‘levy’ regulated entities to cover the cost of the regulator’s adjudication process and the cost of court appeals of the same, in circumstances where the legal framework makes it very difficult or impossible for a regulated entity to recover their costs from a regulator following a successful appeal process (so regulated entity effectively pays both sides’ costs even where they win, and may double-pay towards the regulator’s costs when they lose an appeal).
Submissions are invited on specific questions listed at Appendix A of the Consultation Paper and will be published (with appropriate redactions) unless anonymity is requested.
Next steps and contact
For more information about the LRC’s proposals and the possible implications, or if our support with a submission to the LRC would be helpful, please contact any of the partners named in this insight or your usual Matheson contact.
[1] [2021] IESC 24