An interesting idea....

I see that these four fine Lords (Save for Phillips (a solicitor) they are Lib Dem QCs and Dep High Court Judges - Carlile is the HMG reviewer of terrorism legislation and MacDonald the former DPP and Helena Kennedy's first pupil and soon to be Warden of Wadham College, Oxford.  Thomas is married to Baroness Walmsley) want to amend the Legal Aid Bill passing nosily through the House of Lords to effectively give the senior appellate courts and tribunals the power to force civil legal aid to be granted to a party to a complex issue of law or fact that is of significant wider public interest or where there is some other compelling reason why legal aid should be granted. Imagine the fun such judges would have granting legal aid in controversial cases against HMG where without it, the executive would not be properly challenged by competent lawyers....and for that reason alone, this does not have a cat in the proverbial's chance of success....still an excellent idea....

LORD THOMAS OF GRESFORD
LORD CARLILE OF BERRIEW
LORD PHILLIPS OF SUDBURY
LORD MACDONALD OF RIVER GLAVEN

[In substitution for Amendment 86]

82ZD

Page 136, line 34, at end insert—“Appeals where court or tribunal certifies complex point etc.

(1) Civil legal services provided in relation to an appeal to the Upper Tribunal, the Senior Courts or the Supreme Court where the relevant court or tribunal certifies that—

(a) the appeal raises a complex issue of law or an issue of fact of exceptional complexity (in which case the certificate must identify the issue),

(b) the matter is one of significant wider public interest (in which case the certificate must identify that interest), or

(c) there is some other compelling reason why the proper conduct of the appeal requires the provision of civil legal services (in which case the certificate must set out the reason).

(2) Rules of procedure applicable to the relevant court or tribunal may make provision about certificates under this paragraph.

New Doctors' disciplinary tribunal gets Chair

Following Dame Janet's powerful Shipman Report, HMG removed the GMC's adjudicatory powers over Doctors and vested them in a new state Tribunal- The Office of the Health Professions Adjudicator (OHPA) was born but never got going; it was put to the flames in the bonfire of the quangos last year and the GMC had to fill the breach with a new in- house quango of its own - The Medical Professions Tribunal Service was created - MPTS - funded by Drs rather than tax payers.....well now it has a Chairman -HHJ David Pearl- an academic (Professor at UEA) rather than lawyer - he has led the Immigration Appeal Tribunal as we'll as the Care Standards Tribunal whilst moonlighting on the Judical Appointments Comission as well as the Judicial College. MPTS gets started this Summer with promises of smaller, shorter and more efficient Tribunals...which the GMC has been promising for decades....fingers crossed......Read about it all here.

Update on Chief Coroner...

I think what Mr Djanogly meant to say was "I don't have a clue about when the Chief Coroner will be appointed, ask the Lord Chief Justice...."  Still his answers don't appear to encourage the notion that we will have a CC any time soon......

Chief Coroner

Robert Flello: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice by what date he expects to appoint the Chief Coroner. [87471]

Mr Djanogly: The Lord Chief Justice is responsible for appointing the chief coroner under schedule 8 to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. We are continuing to discuss the matter, including timescales, with the Lord Chief Justice.

Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what recent discussions he has had with (a) his ministerial colleagues and (b) the senior judiciary on the appointment of a Chief Coroner. [87686]

Mr Djanogly: The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr Clarke), and I have discussed the appointment of a Chief Coroner with the Lord Chief Justice in recent weeks. We have not, however, had any discussions with ministerial colleagues on this issue.

Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) when he expects (a) to announce the appointment of a Chief Coroner and (b) the Chief Coroner to take-up his or her post; [87688]

(2) when he plans to announce who will be appointed as a Chief Coroner. [87764]

Mr Djanogly: The Lord Chief Justice is responsible for appointing the Chief Coroner under schedule 8 to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. We are continuing to discuss this matter, including timescales, with the Lord Chief Justice.

20 Dec 2011 : Column 1128W

Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether he plans to meet bereavement organisations to discuss the appointment of a Chief Coroner; and when such meetings will take place. [87690]

Mr Djanogly: Ministry of Justice officials plan to meet bereavement organisations in the new year to discuss implementation of the coroner reforms in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. However, under schedule 8 to the Act, the appointment of the Chief Coroner is a matter for the Lord Chief Justice, following consultation with the Lord Chancellor.

Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether he proposes that the Chief Coroner will be a High Court judge. [87767]

Mr Djanogly: Under Schedule 8 to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 the Chief Coroner must be either a High Court judge or a Circuit judge. Appoin

You heard it here first on Scottish referendum.....and Lord Sumption hears his first case....Wales gets a seal and Greenwich a new coat of arms...

 I understand that HMG is to publish its legal advice on why only the Westminster Parliament can call or grant powers to call a referendum on Scottish independence....you read all about that here first....see my post on that question back in May

Plus Lord Sumption is going to hear his first case in the Supreme Court tomorrow - Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. (Respondent) v E.N.E. Kos 1 Limited (Appellant) which is something very boring about ships and charterparties.  He sits with Phillips P, Walker, Mance and Clarke JJSC.  Watch legal history (first direct appointee from the Bar to the UK's highest court since 1949) being made here from 10.30am .  Lord Sumption was sworn into the SCUK on 11th January - http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/docs/pr_1201.pdf.

Lord Sumption was appointed to the Privy Council (he will also sit in its Judicial Committee) at a meeting on 14th December, when HMQ also handed over the new Welsh Seal to the First Minister of Wales so that he has something to seal new Acts of the National Assembly when Wales starts making its own primary legislation pursuant to Government of Wales Act 2006, a move which brings to an end the time honoured term - the law of England and Wales.

Plus the soon to be Royal Borough of Greenwich has got a new coat of arms.....will the excitement never end....

National Security and Civil Claims

Lots of people are suing HMG alleging loss and damage at the hands of operatives who usually operate in conditions of total secrecy.  HMG can only defend itself from such allegations by relying on evidence which cannot see the light of day.  Public interest immunity is not the answer as that is a shield against permitting inspection of otherwise relevant evidence; it is not a means of permitting HMG to use classified evidence to protect itself (and all the tax payers who have to foot the damages bill).  Following the Supreme Court judgment in Al Rawi, C(losed) M(aterial) P(rocedures) cannot be used in civil damages cases.  CMPs are used in certain immigration and control order (now TPIM) cases to disclose secret evidence to Special Advocates (SAs) who represent HMG's opponents alongside their own representatives but without being able to take instructions once they have seen the sensitive material.    The main role of the SA is to persuade the Court and HMG to disclose as much as possible of the sensitive material to HMG's opponent, usually by way of redaction and gisting.  The SA can also test and challenge the closed material, but without the opponent's instructions or input.  Such procedures have been held to be article 6 compliant ( A v United Kingdom (2009) 49 EHRR 29).  Without them HMG only has the blunt instruments of being unable to defend itself and settling claims which may have no merit (not fair on tax payers) or applying to strike out claims on the basis that they involve issues which are so secret they are effectively non-justicable (not fair on claimants with real claims)(see Carnduff v Rock [2001] EWCA Civ 680, [2001] 1 WLR 1786).  Closed Material Procedures are not ideal, but it is hard to see what the alternative is if greater injustice is to be avoided.  One reform I would welcome is for SAs to be able to communicate with those who represent HMG's opponents, save for permitting them to disclose classified materials, the current total ban on communication seems a little too draconian (and indeed does not apply in Employment Tribunals).  In the US and in some proceedings in the UK, the opponent's legal teams have been appropriately vetted, permitted access to secret material and have then then promised not to disclose it to their own clients.  This puts them in an invidious position, but some think it better than having Special Advocates.  HMG is consulting about all of this and the Special Advocates themselves have also responded in critical terms.   The consultation closes today and we await the results....

Stop Press

Joining Lord Sumption will also be Lord Reed to replace Lord Rodger and Lord Carnwarth to replace Lord Brown....it has been announced today...both of whom I tipped for appointment here...http://ofinteresttolwayers.blogspot.com/2011/08/have-been-busyin-supreme-court.html

Tuesday 20 December 2011

    

New Justices of the Supreme Court

The Queen has been pleased to approve the appointment of the Rt Hon Lord Reed as a Justice of the Supreme Court following the death of the Rt Hon Lord Rodger of Earlsferry with effect from a date to be agreed with the President of the Court.

The Queen has also been pleased to approve the appointment of The Rt Hon Lord Justice Carnwath CVO, Senior President of Tribunals as a Justice of the Supreme Court upon the retirement of The Rt Hon the Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood in April 2012 with effect from a date to be agreed with the President of the Court.
Note for Editors

Biographical Notes

Lord Reed has been a senior judge in Scotland for 13 years being a Senator of the College of Justice since 1998.  He was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in July 1983 where he did a wide range of civil work.  He was appointed to the Bench in 1998.  He was promoted to the Inner House in January 2008.  During 1999 he sat as an ad hoc judge of the European Court of Human Rights, and has sat in both the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and, more recently, as an Acting Judge of the Supreme Court. 

Lord Justice Carnwath has, since 2007 been the Senior President of Tribunals and has led the planning an implementation of the reforms of the tribunal system following the Leggatt report.  He has sat as a Lord Justice in the Court of Appeal (Civil) since 2002, was a judge of the Chancery Division from 1994 to 2002 during which time (1998 to 2002) he was Chairman of the Law Commission. 

Lord Sumption

Have been busy with a Supreme Court case again and therefore not blogging....  Speaking of which, their latest member to be, Lord to be Sumption has been giving us an early insight into his views in a lecture he gave recently in the Inns of Court - seems he wants to judges to be honest about when they are being political, indeed seems to suggest that they should not be political at all.  Wants to get back to good old fashioned black letter law......looks like his judicial career is going to be interesting...lecture here.

Merry Christmas!