Lord Dyson

under construction……

We have also benefited from the
contribution of judges drawn from across
the United Kingdom sitting either as Acting
Judges of the UKSC or in the JCPC. The
following Judges have sat in this financial
year: Lord Thomas, the Lord Chief Justice of
England and Wales, Sir Declan Morgan, Lord
Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, Lord Dyson,
formerly a Justice of the Supreme Court
and recently retired as Master of the Rolls,
recently retired Supreme Court Justices Lord
Toulson and Lord Collins, Lord Gill, formerly
Lord President of the Court of Session, Lord
Justice Gillen from Northern Ireland, Lord
Justice Lewison, and Lady Justice Arden from
England and Wales. We are grateful to all of
them for the contribution they have made. (Mark Ormerod, Chief Executive, The Supreme Court Annual Report and Accounts 2016–2017)

 

Review of the selection process
In our first Annual Report we indicated that a
review of the operation of the selection process
would be carried out by the Chief Executive (JENNY ROWE),
reporting to the Presiding of the Court. In
conducting this review the Chief Executive
wrote to all the statutory consultees under
the Act, and received responses from some,
either in writing or at meetings. She also met
with individual members of the selection
commission established to recommend a
successor to Lord Neuberger, now Master of
the Rolls; received views from the candidates
who had been shortlisted and interviewed;
had a meeting with Baroness Neuberger to
discuss the recommendations of the Advisory
Panel on Judicial Diversity which she chaired;
and had a meeting with the Lord Chief Justice
and the Master of the Rolls. (A shorter version
of this exercise will be repeated at the end of
the current selection process.)
The recommendations of the review fell into
two key areas:
1. The statutory position.
2. The processes adopted by the selection
commission.

Amongst the recommendations made about
the statutory process were:
 There should be no necessity for the Lord
Chancellor to undertake a second round
of consultations after he had received the
report from the selection commission
(section 28(5) of the Act), but the
Chairman of the selection commission
should be placed under an obligation
to let the statutory consultees know
the recommendation made to the Lord
Chancellor.
 A selection commission, once convened,
should remain in place for a period of 12
months and be empowered to deal with
any vacancy which arose in that period.
 Under section 27(5) of the Act, selection
must be on merit. Under sub-section
(8) “In making selections for the
appointment of judges of the Court, the
commission must ensure that between
them the judges will have knowledge of
and experience of practice in the law of
each part of the United Kingdom.” The
legislation should be clarified so that the
provisions at sub-section (8) are included
in the definition of merit.
 The requirement for the Lord Chancellor
formally to make the nomination of each
member of the commission should be
dispensed with.
 The legislation should be clarified to
make it clear that where a vacancy for
the office of President/Deputy President
is anticipated, the selection commission
established to choose the successor
should not include the then serving
President/Deputy President.
These recommendations are with the
Lord Chancellor and his officials for their
consideration. In addition, a number of
recommendations about changes to the
process were adopted by the selection
commission which has just completed its
work, including:
 Continuing with the process of
advertisement and applications.
 Better timetabling.
 A clearer and more comprehensive set of
criteria for evaluating applications.
 Greater clarity over the evidence base
to be considered by the selection
commission.
 Improved guidance to consultees.
A number of outstanding issues remain to be
dealt with, including:
 Devising an application form.
 Better guidance to assist non-judicial
applicants.
 Further outreach work.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/ar_2010_11.pdf

 

As was the case in the House of Lords, most of
the Court’s practice and procedure is set out in
the Practice Directions made by the President.
In this respect, the Court’s procedure follows
that of the Court of Appeal, the High Court
and the county courts in England and Wales
whereby the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 are
supplemented by detailed Practice Directions
which are made by the Head of Civil Justice,
currently Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, the
Master of the Rolls.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/ar_2010_11.pdf

 

The Supreme Court legally replaced the
House of Lords on 1 October 2009 as the
UK’s final court of appeal, when the relevant
provisions of the Constitutional Reform Act
2005 (CRA) were brought into force. At a
ceremony in the Court on the same day, the
former Lords of Appeal in Ordinary were
sworn in as Justices of the new court.
The Court consists of 12 Justices appointed by
Her Majesty The Queen. Eleven of the twelve
former Lords of Appeal in Ordinary became
Justices of the Supreme Court of the United
Kingdom on 1 October 2009. Lord Phillips, the
Senior Lord of Appeal, became President of
the Supreme Court and Lord Hope, the second
senior Lord of Appeal became the Deputy
President. The 12th Lord of Appeal, Lord
Neuberger, was appointed as the Master of the
Rolls (President of the Civil Division of the Court
of Appeal) of England and Wales on the same
date. Sir John Dyson was appointed as the 12th
Justice to replace Lord Neuberger just before
Easter 2010 and was sworn in on 19 April 2010.

 

In July 2009 the then Lord Chancellor, invited
Lord Phillips, the President of the Court to
establish a selection commission. The other
members of the commission were: Lord
Hope, the Deputy President; Lady Smith
representing the Judicial Appointments
Board in Scotland; Baroness Prashar
representing the Judicial Appointments
Commission for England and Wales, and
Mrs Ruth Laird representing the Judicial
Appointments Commission in Northern
Ireland. The statute requires at least one
member of a commission to be a lay
member – in this instance there were two.
The representatives from England and
Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are
nominated by the Judicial Appointments
bodies in the individual jurisdictions.

 

The successful candidate, Sir John Dyson, was
approved by Her Majesty The Queen in March
2010. His appointment was announced by 10
Downing Street on 23 March 2010.

 

https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/ar_2009_10.pdf

 

under construction………..