Close up of hands - one person is handing a card which says "It's going too fast" to an intermediary.

Court users with communication needs are likely to face a number of barriers to effective participation in Immigration Tribunals.

From low-frequency vocabulary like “deportation” and “tribunal”, and abstract concepts such as “modern slavery”, to the demands of processing long stretches of complex verbal information, and providing clear narratives, in an unfamiliar environment, where emotions are likely to be running high.

In addition, a significant number of court users in this setting are likely to not speak English, or to speak English as a second language (ESL), requiring all written and verbal information to be provided in translation. They will likely have a non-British cultural background, making court processes and conventions even less familiar, and more challenging to understand.

Communication difficulties in another language

It can be particularly challenging to identify whether a court user has an underlying communication difficulty beyond a language barrier. For example, an individual may not be familiar with the legal system in England and Wales and therefore find it challenging to understand processes. They may also have difficulty understanding information provided via an interpreter (for example, if the interpreter does not speak their particular dialect well). However, this does not necessarily mean that person has an underlying communication need (such as difficulty processing and understanding information).

An intermediary assessment can explore whether the court user has an underlying communication difficulty, or whether their participation can be facilitated by a skilled interpreter and clear explanations.

Support at court and conferences

If communication difficulties are identified (beyond a language barrier), and an intermediary is recommended to support the individual’s participation in proceedings, an intermediary can be booked to attend at a range of stages (subject to the approval of the court). This may include pre-hearing conferences and hearings.

Intermediaries frequently collaborate with interpreters to support court users who have communication needs and do not speak English as a first language. How this collaboration will work depends on the individual needs of the court user. For example, if an individual is found to have difficulty processing longer stretches of verbal information, the intermediary may ask the court to permit them to provide short, simplified explanations for the interpreter to translate (in lieu of verbatim interpretation).

Other court users may be better assisted by verbatim translation in the courtroom, but with access to “I don’t understand”, “It’s going too fast” and “Break” cards, with ample time for breaks in which the intermediary can check their understanding and provide simple (often visually supported) explanation of key topics which have not been understood. The strategies used and recommendations made will vary depending on the strengths and needs of the court user.

Make a referral using our online portal or call us on 0121 663 0931 to discuss options in a specific case.


To learn more about the intermediary role, visit The Access Brief – a bank of free bite-sized guides developed for legal professionals by intermediaries.

Here you will find information about the intermediary role in Ground Rules Hearings, the purpose of ‘questions in advance’, and specific guidance on working with clients with common conditions which impact communication.


Testimonials


I just wanted to pass on some feedback in relation to your intermediary who has been assisting our client both yesterday and today. They were absolutely brilliant. They were very well prepared and helped to make matters run very smoothly.

ALEX PANAYIDES, HAYMAN SOLICITORS


“I should like to take this opportunity to express my huge gratitude for the sterling assistance given by your intermediary. She has helped me greatly with how best to speak to my client, and she was absolutely invaluable during cross examination with many constructive suggestions about rephrasing questions. The judge has been extremely receptive to your intermediary’s advice.”

BARRISTER, 4PB