Progress in appointing women and ethnic minorities as judges has been too slow, justice secretary tells House of Lords. We’ve heard this all before, but perhaps there is a new slant in that the Equality Act  allows a type of positive discrimination, such that where there are 2 very equal applicants for a role, it is lawful to use the under representation of one of the two as a reason for getting the job.

This is all well and good but progress in equality and representation of both sexes and all ethinicities is painfully slow, so maybe politicians should stop harping on about it, talk is cheap !

Two new appointees have been named as Supreme Court judges.

The appointees are Lord Reed, a Scottish appeal judge and expert in human rights law, and Lord Justice Carnwath, former chairman of the Law Commission.

The new appointments arise due to the death of Lord Rodger in June 2011 and the retirement of Lord Brown in April 2012.

The legal and general press, whilst welcoming these 2 esteemed men to the highest court, have pointed out that despite strong statements and indications that more women are needed at the higher echelons of the Judiciary, this has not happened.

It is of course paramount that criteria of competence and total integrity are always applied to Judicial appointments but diversity is always welcome. Mr Singh has the highest reputation and has been appointed to the Queen’s Bench division.

It seems like everyone in the legal profession currently feel as though they are under attack, even the most senior Judiciary.

In the annual address made to senior Judge’s at the Mansion house last week also attended by Justice Secretary ken Clarke, Lord Judge used all his considerable legal and other skills to make clear his and other judge’s irritation, whilst stopping sort if naming names. He could easily have taken to task those who have been less than helpful, such as European judges or the Prime Minister’s suggestion that judges make up the law on privacy. He could also have pointed out that it is not Judges, but instead politicians, who are in the firing line for the serious hacking scandal and claims of nepotism and inappropriate relationships.

The Lord Chief justice also took the opportunity to make it clear that strenuous efforts need to continue to improve the ethnicity and gender gaps in the Judiciary, which is also to be welcomed, but is no easy task, nor is it a new issue.

Some senior costs Judges in the Senior Court Costs Office have voiced their concerns about the costs changed advocated by the much heralded Jackson Report

These Judges are at the front line of the personal injury costs debate, with many solicitors being pilloried for so-called “ambulance chasing”. Whilst we can understand the furore surrounding claims management companies, who do much of the marketing for personal injury claims (more because lawyers seem inherently averse to marketing), it is often forgotten that the no-win, no-fee claims system constitutes a risk for lawyers, and ultimately a service has been provided to many who would not otherwise have access to justice. The excesses in the system are perhaps more caused by the plethora of fraudulent claims, creating a huge drain on resources and increasing insurance premium=s for all.

Returning to the concerns of the 3 costs Judges, they particularly cited the fact that should the Jackson reforms be implemented, seemingly extremely likely, claimants who have suffered serious medical injuries may well end up losing thousands needed for their care because those costs will need to be paid by them to their lawyers and not by the defendants by way of the success fee.

The Judges also suggested that insurers and their representatives should also take a look at themselves in that, in their experience, defence handling of claims leaves much to be desired.

The Judges commented that “In some cases, the litigation is conducted with hostility, thereby requiring claimants to address each and every point” … and “In others, defendants delay, thereby causing unnecessary additional costs”.

The judges recommended standardising litigation insurance premiums wherever possible, reducing the success fee after an admission of liability and restricting the availability of CFAs to individuals.

Some fascinating figures have been released  for the first time by the so-called “Judicial diversity taskforce”, tasked to try and assist in making the Judiciary more reflective of society as a whole by 2020. Here are some very brief highlights :-

• In 1998 10.3% of judges in England and Wales were women
• In 2010 20.6% of Judges in England & Wales are women
• In 1998 1.6% of Judges were either black or from minority ethnic groups
• In 2010 4.8% of Judges are either black or from ethnic minorities

Whilst it has been known for some times that many local courts would be closed as part of cost cutting measures, the full extent has now been made clear and the changes are nothing short of drastic.  It has now been confirmed that 93 Magistrates Courts and 49 County Courts will close and the government states that these closures will save an estimated £41.5 million, although £22 million has apparently been earmarked for improvements and modernisation of other courts.

It is believed that the closure of some courts will result in increased use of technology and a speeding up of processes and that the lack of a physical courtroom could result in more cases being dealt with without the need for an attendance at court, although it remains to be seen how this will work out.

Christopher Stephens has been announced as the next chairman of the Judicial Appointments Commission. His appointment is for 3 years from February 7, 2011, and is renewable. Mr Stephens has an auspicious background and is chairman of Traidcraft plc and a non-executive director o several large corporate and heavily involved with charity work also. His background also includes time spent as  a Civil Service Commissioner and a member of the Senior Salaries Review Body until last month.

The Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) has announced that there are 98 new positions available for the role of Recorder covering crime and family law and in multiple court circuits around the country in the North East, South East, West of England  and Wales.

The role of Recorder

Recorders can sit in both the Crown Court and County Courts and have a role broadly similar to that of a Circuit Judge, but  in general terms, they deal with less complicated  or serious matters. A Recorder is expected to be free to preside for a minimum of 15 days but they do not normally sit for in excess of 30 days a year.

Who can apply ?

Applications, according to the JAC, are welcome  from suitably qualified candidates whatever their legal background, apparently encouraging more solicitors to apply, since figures show that in 1998, whilst solicitors comprised some 85% of those eligible to apply, only 20% of applicants were solicitors. In the current climate, with a surplus of lawyers and with work volumes dropping, it will be interesting to see whether there is a significant increase in the number of applications made.

Thanks to Ben Jones of Darlingtons Solicitors for this post. Ben specialises in employment law & corporate law.