There could be circumstances where stage 2 is adjourned to give parents more time, but they would have to be exceptional. I recall one instance where the parent had no understanding of the appeal process, and was totally unprepared, but the possibility of some really compelling medical evidence emerged out of the blue. The child was due to visit hospital the next day, and the parent agreed to request a letter of support. The hearing resumed a couple of weeks later, the panel accepted that the evidence was indeed compelling, and the appeal was upheld.
However, with regard to stage 1, I would not expect the admission authority to be given more time (because it ought to know what it's doing!).
I had thought, perhaps wrongly, that the adjournment in the case you refer to was because the panel required further information, rather than because the authority was ill-prepared. (It depends where the emphasis is
Without knowing exactly what the issues were, it's difficult for me to comment, but I'll give an example of where a stage 1 adjournment might be reasonable:
The panel thinks that the admission arrangements were flawed, but this in itself is insufficient for appeals to be upheld. It has to be shown that the appellants would have got a place if the admission arrangements had been correctly applied. It might then be necessary to adjourn to re-check all the applications and to work out how the appellants have been affected.
A delay until late July does not seem acceptable, especially as it emerged that the panel could reconvene within a fortnight.
The panel must
stay the same - unless it is proposed to begin stage 1 again ............