Lord Wilson of Culworth (Lord Nicholas Allan Roy Wilson)
“The barrister is not only the actor in the play, but, albeit with substantial assistance from the solicitor, he also writes the script and designs the set. When the show is a success there is no feeling more wonderful.” (Lord Wilson)
Can you entertain this Judge enough so as to pursue your legal rights and seek justice?
Lord Wilson (b. 9 May 1945), Justice of the Supreme Court (2011 – present)
Styled Lord Wilson of Culworth, upon being appointed to the Supreme Court. Title given for life. He is considered one of the 21st Century Bad Judges. See ‘Top British Corrupt Judges of the 21st Century‘. Click here.
Culworth is a village. It occupies the hilltop in the south west of Northamptonshirewhere and is Lord Wilson’s permanent residence. Member of the Parliament for Culworth is Andrea Leadsom, Conservative, Leader of the House of Commons
and Lord President of the Council since 11 June 2017.
Grandson of Sir Roderick Roy Wilson, Esq (1876 – 1942) a British banker and politician, and Member of Parliament for Lichfield (Conservative MP) from 29 October 1924 to May 1929; Knighted in 1929.
Profile: the 11 justices of the UK supreme court. The justices deciding on the appeal by the government against the high court’s ruling on article 50, The Guardian, 5 Dec. 2016
Summary of Lord Wilson’s characteristics:
- unable to enter Oxford University on his own, needed a professor to take pity on him;
- unable to enter the profession of barrister on his own, needed his mother;
- no law degree or academic training – only a BA from Worcester University at Oxford;
- received honorary degrees to enhance his academics;
- comes from a poor family but with good connections to allow him to enter high positions of authority;
- has a narcissistic view of women;
- has a grandiose nature when expressing himself;
- believes in nepotism and applies it;
- failed miserably as a Judge in Her Majesty’s Courts;
- delusional as he cannot distinguish between countries and where proceedings took place;
- has no ability to understand cases and relies on his connections to ensure his judicial employment;
- developed an obsession with some of his cases and ensures control of the parties after the legal proceedings;
- would rather protect a perpetrator even if means making up false evidence and shaming the real victim in the media;
- has low opinion of women who fight for justice;
- capable of using all connections possible to protect his deceitful and unlawful actions;
- feels entitled to change the law and the justice system as he sees fit to fulfil his own agenda and personal desires;
- has a demeaning view of family courts and litigants in person;
- has strong belief that the court is the place to put a show on: “When the show is a success there is no feeling more wonderful.”;
- used his connections to promote his wife into Her Majesty’s Courts and Judicial position;
- ensures through his connections again that his wife has a high rate of success as a mediator;
- enjoys presents in the form of horses and training of horses;
- has a demeaning view of the nuclear family;
- contributed in 2016 to the early retirement of Lord Dyson (Master of the Rolls and Head of the Civil Division);
- contributed in 2017 to the early retirement of Lord Neuberger (President of the Supreme Court and former Master of the Rolls and Head of the Civil Division when he was a Lord Justice of Appeal);
- given Licence to Judge by Her Majesty the Queen to make new law, when he clearly failed to apply the law in the lower courts;
- considered the most corrupt Judge of the 21st Century.
The Impeachment of Lord Wilson: first ever Supreme Court Judge to be impeached from Judicial Office.
Supreme Court Justices are not subject to term limits, but may be removed from office on the address of Parliament. Like all British judges, Supreme Court justices are obliged to retire at age 70 if first appointed to a judicial office after 31 March 1995, or at age 75 otherwise. Lord Wilson is due to retire in 2020 if not impeached before this date. Until then significant harm is being caused to the Justice System for keeping him in this highly influential judicial position and the making of the law in the UK. His unlawful behaviour gave rise to a matter of ‘national security’, as defined by the new Master of the Rolls, Sir Terence Etherton. See ‘The Impeachment of Lord Wilson’. Click here.
Lord Wilson’s views on his intellect and achievements:
On entering Oxford College:
….at 18 when 3 Oxbridge colleges turned me down for admission before Professor Reynolds at Worcester College took pity on me. (Newsletter, Summer 2011 – Family Law Bar Association)
On entering the barristerial path:
….entirely by accident; my mother (Dorothy Anne Chenevix Trench) knew a lady who knew (Sir) James Comyn and one telephone call on my mother’s part to her elicited the reply that he would be delighted to fix me up with a pupillage in his chambers in 1967 – assuming of course that I had the requisite 100 guineas to pay to my pupil master…Then when I was offered the tenancy I stayed on, enthusiastically… It was shockingly nepotistic. (Newsletter, Summer 2011 – Family Law Bar Association)
Lord Wilson’s views on women:
As a barrister, Lord Wilson most likely made use of his connections to protect Bill Wyman as he engaged in sexual activities with a minor: Rolling Stone Bill Wyman who was involved at 47 years of age with a minor by the name of Mandy Smith, 13 years of age at the time, and then married her when she turned 18 years old and he was 52. “They separated in 1991 and the divorce was finalized two years later, with Smith receiving a £580,000 payout.” Bill Wyman’s oldest son Stephen (from a previous marriage) announced his engagement to Mandy Smith’s mother, Patsy. That couple’s marriage reportedly lasted two years, until their divorce in 1995. Never charged with having sex with a minor, as his case was dropped and never investigated by the Police.
As a Judge in the lower court, he kept personal relationships with women and female children involved in litigation to control their lives: Re C (Adoption: religious Observance)  1 FLR 1119 controversial case “because the girl had a mixed ethnicity and I ordered her to be adopted by parents who were wholly Jewish, she being only one quarter Jewish, and the social workers were concerned that was an inappropriate ethnic match – I overrode them because I was so impressed with the adopters – then 3 weeks after I had made the ultimate adoption order something terrible happened, namely, quite unexpectedly, the adoptive father died. So I had placed the child with a single mother. I felt very worried about that for a long time. In fact the mother has brought up the child beautifully in the context of a very supportive wider family in Manchester and I was thrilled when they asked me to go up on Sunday to participate in her bat mitzvah. That is the sort of role of the family judge which is unsurpassable in terms of job satisfaction. I keep up with about 5 or 6 of my adopted children – I find they write letters to me just before their birthdays, just to jog my memory as to their continued existence!” – Newsletter, Summer 2011 – Family Law Bar Association.
As a Judge in the Court of Appeal, he displayed grandiose views on a case which he did not read and did not prepared for allowing himself to make up evidence against the Wife in the defended divorce proceedings to damage her case in the financial proceedings. On 23rd November 2010, Lord Wilson made reference to the wrong application, made up evidence to cause slander and ridicule the applicant Wife, cited unproven facts in any lower court, produced a Judgment with 99% deficiencies (although he stated having spent 4 hours to read the case when the case did not require more than 1 hour of reading given that there were no bundles filed with the Court of Appeal as the lower court failed to order bundles for the final hearing and the lower court accepted not having any files to deal with the case, thus raising the appeal before Lord Wilson). His delusion and clear dislike of the applicant Wife let Lord Wilson to produce a dramatic delivery of his Judgment based on false facts only to produce a sensational story for the media. After the media and legal professionals found out, the next day, how delusional Lord Wilson was on the day of the appeal and how grandiosely he played his judicial game, the story and comments were retracted.
As a Judge in the Supreme Court, he felt entitled to also act as a Legal Consultant on taxpayer funds to help an employee with his divorce proceedings. According to this Supreme Court employee, Mr John Landtree, Lord Wilson’s view of women is that they must be defeated. It was directly stated by Mr Landtree that Lord Wilson views women to be “hysterical” and “grabbers during divorce“, hence providing unlawful and unethical legal assistance to Mr Landtree. Lord Wilson is a barrister by trade and since becoming a Judge he does not hold a Practicing Certificate. His unlawful behaviour was against the implemented policies of the Supreme Court which state that Judges in the Supreme Court cannot perform any other jobs. Lord Neuberger, the President of the Supreme Court officially accepted that Lord Wilson played a role in the divorce of the Supreme Court employee and conducted such act as a “private favour”. Lord Neuberger has now resigned his position that of the President of the Supreme Court. He was also the Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Division when Lord Wilson, then known as Lord Justice Wilson, was a Judge in the Court of Appeal. Lord Neuberger failed twice in his management of the courts (Court of Appeal and then Supreme Court) and unlawfully allowed illegal activities of Judges in his courts.
Applicant candidates for the two open Supreme Court positions in 2010:
Sir Maurice Kay, Sir John Laws, Sir Timothy Lloyd, Jonathan Sumption OBE QC, Sir Nicholas Wilson.
Lord Wilson’s views on his nomination to the Supreme Court:
I was amazed and even now 3 months after the rumours first surfaced I still feel amazed – I knew that I was in the running because I got an interview but when push came to shove I thought they would choose someone other than a family lawyer… I accepted that there were still relatively few family appeals to the Supreme Court (I think now about 6 a year)…I’ll be out of my comfort zone for 90% of the year.
I am worried that with so few family cases reaching this court each year I will lose my day to day grip on family law and I am worried that when I ultimately retire I may not have as much grasp, or may not feel I have as much grasp of family law as I would want – it may be by that time no one will want me to be a family mediator – I may have to find something else with which to keep myself occupied.
(Newsletter, Summer 2011 – Family Law Bar Association)
Main individuals responsible for the appointment of this 21st Century Bad Judge to the Supreme Court:
Prime Minister – David Cameron
Lord Chancellor – Ken Clarke (the Legal Aid cutter) held the power to ask the UKSC appointment commission to reconsider its choice if so was to be considered: either because he had not seen enough evidence that one of those selected is suitable for the job or because there was evidence that the chosen candidate is not the best person “on merit”.
Selection Commission for the appointment of this 21st Century Bad Judge:
|Lord Hope||Deputy President|
|Lord Justice Coghlin||Judicial Appointments Commission for Judicial Appointments Commission for Northern Ireland|
|Sir Muir Russell KCB||Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland|
|Professor Dame Hazel Genn||Judicial Appointment Commission for England & Wales|
Quotes (amounting to a slur) by Lord Wilson:
Family law…something like Leyton Orient – in other words practising in the third division… rather than a slight on the east end of London.
I would encourage anybody interested not only in the law, but also in communication, to choose the barristerial rather than the solicitorial path……The barrister is not only the actor in the play, but, albeit with substantial assistance from the solicitor, he also writes the script and designs the set. When the show is a success there is no feeling more wonderful. (Newsletter, Summer 2011 – Family Law Bar Association. Click here or the interview here.)
“It’s the end of the nuclear family … and that’s no bad thing, insists Supreme Court judge who says he fears watching couples take their wedding vows”. (View story here.)
Lord Wilson’s family and parents financial position when growing up:
|Father||Roderick Peter Garratt Wilson (born 1913 – died 1994), son of Sir Roderick Roy Wilson, Esq; known as Peter Wilson; a naval officer who taught languages at Dartmouth Naval College after resigning his commission due to ill-health.|
|Mother||Dorothy Anne Chenevix Trench (born 30 August 1916 in India) daughter of Colonel Arthur Henry Chenevix Trench and Dorothy Pauline Steel; she gained the rank of 2nd Officer in the Women’s Royal Naval Service; known as Anne Wilson after marrying the son of son of Sir Roderick Wilson; studied at Trinity College of Music qualifying to teach piano as in need of income; a guide at Parham House where she stayed for 43 years, also guiding at Goodwood House for 25 years; in 1994 reluctantly moved to ‘The Old School’ where she has been happy with two pianos in the old schoolroom.|
|Parents marriage and residence||10 April 1942; lived in Fittleworth for more than 50 years, bought Three Chimneys in 1958|
|Parents financial position when growing up||Sick father and mother in need of income.|
|Grandfather||Sir Roderick Roy Wilson, Esq (born 10 August 1876 – died 27 August 1942); British banker and politician; Member of Parliament for Lichfield (Conservative MP) from 29 October 1924 to May 1929; Knighted in 1929; Chairman of the British Guiana Parliamentary Commission, 1926.|
|Sibling||Reverend Francesca Dorothy (born 8 August 1952 – died 29 June 2014, age 61); Wife of late John Dudley Dixon (died 1996); Married in 1985 and known as Dixon; Graduated from Cambridge University, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, England with a Master of Arts (M.A.); Graduated with a Diploma of Theology; John Dudley Dixon was invested as a Member, Order of the British Empire (M.B.E.) and decorated with the award of the Distinguished Service Cross (D.S.C.) (and two bars); children: Nicholas Dixon and Francesca Dixon; worked at St Mary’s Church, Pulborough, West Sussex as Honorary Assistant Priest and place for her funeral mass on 29 July 2014.|
|Wife *||Margaret Higgins, daughter of Reginald Francis Higgins; called to the Bar in July 1966 by Middle Temple; admitted to Inner Temple in 1968 entitled to practice as a Barrister-at-Law; worked at 3 Hare Court, London from 1967 to 1986 and ceased practice from 1987 onwards (same time as her Husband was made Recorder in the Crown Court); currently on records as an unregistered Barrister (does not hold a Practising Certificate); from 1974, her married name became Wilson; subsequently became Lady Wilson and Judge of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) until she retired in April 2015, a mediator at Tanfield Chambers.|
|Child 1||Matthew Roderick Benjamin Wilson, born 1977 (attended at Eton College and known to have been once editor of the Eton Chronicle; his father in his own words relates to using his former client to do a favour for him to interview Former Rolling Stone Bill Wyman (former client): “my son Matthew was once editor of the Eton Chronicle, and I said I have a real favour of you Bill, would you be prepared for my son to interview you on behalf of the Eton Chronicle – he said yes, come down next week. So Matthew went down and came back that evening – I asked him how it went and he said fine – I said “let’s hear it, come on” – and none of it had taken! And so I rang up Bill Wyman who said don’t worry, let him come down again tomorrow and we’ll do it all over again – wasn’t that wonderful? – (Newsletter, Summer 2011 – Family Law Bar Association)|
|Child 2||Camilla Jessica Wilson, born 1981|
* Click here for a full profile of Lady Wilson, former Judge (like her Husband – Lord Wilson) and her assurance for success to her clients (of course for a significant fee). Justice for sale to the highest bidder?
I am a proactive mediator with a very high record of success.
Employment and other functions:
|1 October 1967||Pupil at Queen Elizabeth Bldg (QEB)|
|1967 – 1987||Barrister-at-Law at Queen Elizabeth Bldg (QEB), London|
|1987||Queen’s Counsel (QC)|
|1987 – 1993||Recorder of the Crown Court (Western Circuit)|
|1993 – 2005||Knight Bachelor and a Judge in the High Court of Justice (Family Division)|
|1998 – 2011||President of Family Mediators Association (FMA); endorsed a book on mediation (Dec 2014) by his colleague co-founder of FMA and the first Director of FMA Lisa Parkinson: “all of us who work in the system need a comprehensive understanding of family mediation, the practice of which is far more complex and multi-faced…we will need a vademecum. It will be Lisa Parkinson’s book.“)|
|2003 – 2007||Director at Foundations UK (Companies House: other human health activities and Charity registered to relief of those suffering with eating disorders, preservation and protection of the physical and mental health of families and friends of those suffering from any such eating disorders.|
|2005 – May 2011||Lord Justice of Appeal, Royal Courts of Justice|
|26 May 2011 – present||Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and gaining the courtesy style “Lord Wilson of Culworth” for life – not a holder of a Practising Certificate (important as he dealt with divorce proceedings for a court employee, Mr John Landtree, while sitting as a Supreme Court Judge)|
Lord Justice of the Court of Appeal – 2009 to 2011 was in the amount of £196,707 plus all other payments in relation to London Weighting and appropriate travelling and subsistence allowances incurred whilst on judicial business such as travel, lodging, food, conferences, dinner/events attendances etc paid in addition to the judicial salary. Ministry of Justice stated that “these are not financial gains, but allowances to defray costs legitimately incurred whilst on judicial business“. For government confirmed statistics click here.
Justice of the Supreme Court – 2011 to 2014 was in the amount of £206,857 to $211,015 plus all other payments in relation to London Weighting and appropriate travelling and subsistence allowances incurred whilst on judicial business such as travel, lodging, food, conferences, dinner/events attendances etc paid in addition to the judicial salary. Ministry of Justice stated that “these are not financial gains, but allowances to defray costs legitimately incurred whilst on judicial business“. For government confirmed statistics click here.
Bryanston School, Blandford, Dorset, England (all boys school at the time)
Worcester College, Oxford University, Oxford, Oxfordshire, England – Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) Admission as pity on him.
Pupil at QEB then Barrister-at-Law – accepted as a favour to his mother
No law degree or higher education, only honorary awards.
Honorary Doctor Staffordshire University (2004)
Honorary Fellow Worcester College Oxford (2008)
Interests outside the law: Racing, music, theatre and horses (owns the race horse Ben Trovato)
I have had a succession of racehorses given to me and trained for me. I’ve got a new one as of last winter.
(Newsletter, Summer 2011 – Family Law Bar Association)
Best known for his views and dramatic delivery of his Judgments:
The following hyperlinks represent each of the Judgment summaries Lord Wilson delivered during the legal year 2013/14 as provided by the Supreme Court:
Endorsement: “Neil’s most striking attribute is the extraordinary degree of passion he brings to bear – and communicates – on the subject of mediation. He is totally convinced that our community would benefit if mediation had a higher profile; and that mediators must improve their service, develop different techniques for different types of case, co-operate better with solicitors and other professionals, tackle even the most difficult cases and press the value of their services more effectively upon the public and upon government.” – Lord Wilson of Culworth, Supreme Court Judge and former President of FMA.”
Working at the Court of Appeal: “I enjoyed bits of it. As you know I had some interesting cases and enjoyed writing what I hoped were clear, tightly drawn, judgments but there was too much really negative family work. Too much of my time was taken up in seeking unsuccessfully to explain to distraught parents or angry parents, usually acting in person, why they did not have a real prospect of success on appeal and I found that work as negative as I had found the work in the Division to be positive.” Newsletter, Summer 2011 – Family Law Bar Association
Contributions to the Legal System:
New legislation in relation to jurisdiction for the investigation of complaints against the judicial behaviour of Judges appointed from a lower court to the Supreme Court to come into effect: Following the official complaint against Lord Wilson’s unethical behaviour during one of his last cases in the Court of Appeal at the Royal Courts of Justice and prior to his appointment at the Supreme Court, new policies are being developed by the Parliament and the Supreme Court on how to determine the required steps and jurisdiction of the investigative authorities when a complaint against a Justice who has been appointed to the highest court in the United Kingdom, Supreme Court, is to be investigated for any alleged failed judicial behaviour while sitting at a lower court. Confirmed by Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.
Question to the UK Supreme Court: ““…under what Act and paragraph number of the Act…” does the UK Supreme Court not have the power to investigate complaints against former Judicial Office holders in the Court of Appeal? “
Official response from the UK Supreme Court: “There is no Act which says that we do not have that power, but equally there is no Act that says that we do. The point here is not any question of statutory power or responsibility, rather it is the fact that we are a completely separate body from the Court Service of England and Wales and this Court has a UK wide jurisdiction. The UKSC is a non-Ministerial Department whose administration is wholly separate from that off Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) and the Ministry of Justice. You ask me to clarify if the JCIO contacted the UKSC in relation to this matter. The answer to this question is no. However, we subsequently had discussions with the JCIO in the light of the Judicial Ombudsman’s report to consider how we handle any future complaints made against a Supreme Court Justice that relate to their time as a judicial office holder in a lower court.” (14 August 2014)
Behaviour while at the Supreme Court:
Desired behaviour in his own works on his work at the Supreme Court in an interview with the Family Law Bar Association:
“Question: Do you think the ethic of your work in the Supreme Court will be rather different from the lower courts? I mean in particular that you are now able to make law, and not merely apply it.
Answer: It’s a good question and I would be able to give a better answer if I had been here for one year rather one month. Bearing in mind that for over 40 years I have been analysing legal questions in terms of what the law is and how the facts before me fit in to the existing law it’s a habit that is difficult to shed – but you are absolutely right and I will have to and look forward to developing an approach that goes wider than the existing law is; and that leads on to a question about the role of this court and the interface between this court and Parliament across the square – out of my window here. The Supreme Court does not make political decisions but it makes decisions with immense political ramifications, in particular as a result of the requirement in the 1998 Act that it should enforce human rights and particularly, obviously, as a result of the supremacy of EU legislation, which gives supremacy to EU law, and obviously now, also, the legislation which has created important functions for the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly with the resultant demarcation disputes between the various Parliamentary bodies. All that puts this court in the forefront of political discussions and casts a heavy burden on its unelected judges.” (Newsletter, Summer 2011 – Family Law Bar Association)