7.200Abatement is the suspension of proceedings pending the appointment of someone to represent a party who has died.1Smith v Williams [1922] 1 KB 158 at 164. In theory, this is a case management power, as the proceedings are capable of being revived. However, for practical purposes they may often be regarded as closed.2R(I) 2/83.

7.201If a party dies, the first issue is: do the proceedings survive? The answer depends on: (i) the nature of the proceedings; (ii) the interpretation of the relevant legislation; and (iii) if appropriate, section 1(1) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934. The authorities were analysed in Barder v Caluori.3[1988] AC 20. See also Harb v King Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz [2006] 1 FLR 825.

7.202If the proceedings survive, the second issue is: who is to represent the deceased party? Legislation may make provision for this, as regulation 30 of the Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987 does. Otherwise an executor or administrator may act on behalf of the estate.

7.203The third issue is: what happens to the proceedings pending the appointment, if any, of a representative? This was considered in a series of cases by the Commissioners. It may sometimes be possible to give a decision disposing of the appeal. A decision-maker who is the appellant may be willing to withdraw the appeal.4As suggested by the Commissioner in R(SB) 25/84 at [3]. A decision-maker who is the respondent may undertake not to enforce the decision under appeal if the appeal is dismissed.5As in R(S) 7/56. If the decision-maker has appealed in the party’s favour, it may be appropriate to allow the appeal.6As in CS 13/48, cited in R(I) 7/62 at [6]. Otherwise, it is preferable to abate the case rather than dismiss it.7R(I) 2/83 and R(SB) 25/84. In Torbay Borough Council v BW,8[2011] UKUT 305 (AAC) at [11]. the Upper Tribunal decided that abatement was not automatic, but depended on how the interests of justice would better be served.