Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T05:13:50.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - The structure and governance of the English judiciary

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2014

Shimon Shetreet  and
Sophie Turenne
Shimon Shetreet
Affiliation:
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Sophie Turenne
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

Introduction

3.1 This chapter comprises four sections. First, we set out an overview of the structure of the courts and tribunals. Second, we consider the judicial hierarchy of those courts, with some observations on tribunals. Third, we examine the recent transfer of judicial governance by civil servants to the partnership with the judiciary and Her Majesty’s Courts Service (HMCS, recently relabelled HMCTS (Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service) to reflect the inclusion of tribunals). Fourth, we discuss three particular administrative responsibilities which are now transferred to judges, namely decisions on deployment and case assignment given to senior judges and the increased emphasis on case management for all trial judges.

Laws are of little value if the legal system does not provide an efficient method for enforcing them and obtaining redress for their violation. This requires an efficient organisation of the judiciary and an efficient judicial process, characterised by consistency and constancy. In this respect, the Concordat and the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (CRA) vest in the Lord Chief Justice some considerable responsibilities in respect of the judiciary and of the business of the courts of England and Wales. This may explain why for most judges interviewed the administration of justice was seen as one the main areas where changes had deeply affected the judiciary. The Lord Chief Justice exercises these responsibilities by delegation, thereby formalising the existing hierarchy and leadership positions within the judiciary and reflecting specific arrangements for judicial governance. These structures and practices determine the way in which judges relate to each other and achieve a sense of collective independence. The Senior President of Tribunals is at present a separate judicial office with similar, but not identical, responsibilities to the Lord Chief Justice.

Type
Chapter
Information
Judges on Trial
The Independence and Accountability of the English Judiciary
 , pp. 47 - 101
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bell, J., Judiciaries within Europe, A Comparative Review (Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 21, 26, 359–60, 368.Google Scholar
Resnik, J., ‘Managerial Judges’ (1982) 96 HLR 374.
Bailey, S.H., Ching, J.P.L. and Taylor, N.W., Smith, Bailey and Gunn on the Modern English Legal System, 5th edn (London: Sweet and Maxwell, 2007).Google Scholar
Polden, P., A History of the County Courts 1846–1971 (Cambridge University Press, 1999), p. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seago, P., Walker, C. and Wall, D., ‘The Development of the Professional Magistracy in England and Wales’ [2000] Crim LR 631.
Clarke, A., ‘Soliciting Justice’ (1999) 96 Law Society Gazette28.Google Scholar
Bondy, V. and Sunkin, M., ‘The Dynamics of Judicial Review Litigation: the Resolution of Public Law Challenges Before Final Hearing’ (London: The Public Law Project, 2009)
Sunkin, M. et al, ‘The Positive Effect of Judicial Review on the Quality of Local Government’ [2010] Judicial Review 337.
O’Connor, P., ‘The Constitutional Role of the Privy Council and the Prerogative, a JUSTICE Report’ (2009).
Paterson, A., The Law Lords (London: Macmillan, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blom-Cooper, L. and Drewry, G., Final Appeal: A Study of the House of Lords in its Judicial Capacity (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972).Google Scholar
Leggatt, A., ‘Review of Tribunals, Tribunals for Users, One System, One Service’, HMSO (2001).
Richardson, G., ‘Tribunals’, in Feldman, D. (ed.), English Public Law (Oxford University Press, 2004), ch. 20Google Scholar
Wade, H.W. and Forsyth, C.F., Administrative Law, 10th edn (Oxford University Press, 2009), p. 773Google Scholar
Cornford, T., ‘Administrative Redress: the Law Commission’s Consultation Paper’ [2009] PL 70.
Cane, P., ‘Judicial Review in the Age of Tribunals’ [2009] PL 479, conclusion
Wade, W. and Forsyth, C., Administrative Law, 10th edn (Oxford University Press, 2009), ch. 24.Google Scholar
Richardson, G. and Genn, H., ‘Tribunals in transition: resolution or adjudication?’ [2007] PL 2007 119
Harlow, C. and Rawlings, R., Law and Administration, 2nd edn (London: Butterworths, 1997).Google Scholar
Buck, T., ‘Precedent in Tribunals and the Development of Principles’ (2006) 25 CJQ 458
Carnwath, R., ‘Tribunal Justice – a New Start’ [2009] PL 48
Laurie, E., ‘Assessing the Upper Tribunal’s Potential to Deliver Administrative Justice’ (2012) PL 288.
Laurie, E., ‘Assessing the Upper Tribunal’s Potential to Deliver Administrative Justice’ (2012) PL 288.
Sanders, A., ‘Prosecutions in England and Wales’ in Tak, J.-P. (ed.), Tasks and Powers of the Prosecution Services in the EU Member States, Vol. I (Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 2004).Google Scholar
Rogers, J., ‘Restructuring the Exercise of Prosecutorial Discretion in England’ (2006) 26 OJLS 775.
Rogers, J., ‘Prosecutorial Policies, Prosecutorial Systems, and the Purdy Litigation’ [2010] Crim LR 543–4.
Spencer, J., Evidence 106, HC Constitutional Affairs Committee, ‘Constitutional Role of the Attorney General. Fifth Report of Session 2006–07’ (HC 306, 2007).
Lord Chief Justice, ‘The Review of the Administration of Justice in the Courts’ (HC 448, 2008), pp. 48–50.
Lord Chief Justice, ‘The Judicial Studies Board Lecture 2010’, Inner Temple (17 March 2010).
Mackay, , ‘The Lord Chancellor in the 1990s’, inaugural Mischon Lecture at University College London (6 March 1991), para. 28.
Thomas, LJ, ‘The Judges’ Council’ [2005] PL 608.
Lane, G., ‘Judicial Independence and the Increasing Executive Role in Judicial Administration’, in Shetreet, S. and Deschenes, J. (eds.), Judicial Independence: The Contemporary Debate (Leiden: M. Nijhoff, 1985), p. 525.Google Scholar
Reeves, A., The Path to Justice: A Review of the County Court System in England and Wales (Brighton: Emerald Publishing, 2006), p. 80.Google Scholar
Jagtenberg, R. and De Roo, A., ‘From Traditional Judicial Styles to Verdict Industries Inc’, in Huls, N., Adams, M. and Bomhoff, J. (eds.), The Legitimacy of Highest Courts’ Rulings (The Hague: TMC Asser Press, 2009), p. 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, J., ‘Sweden’s Contribution to the Governance of the Judiciary’, in Andenas, M. and Fairgrieve, D. (eds.), Tom Bingham and the Transformation of the Law. A Liber Amicorum (Oxford University Press, 2009), p. 221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooke, LJ, ‘Courts Modernisation and the Crisis Facing our Civil Courts’, 7th ILAS Annual Lecture (24 November 2004).
Mackay, , The Administration of Justice (London: Stevens & Sons/Sweet & Maxwell, 1994), Hamlyn Lectures, p. 20.Google Scholar
Browne-Wilkinson, N., ‘The Independence of the Judiciary in the 1980s’ [1988] PL 44, 53
Ackner, , The Erosion of Judicial Independence (John Stuart Mill Institute, 1997).Google Scholar
Falconer, , Hansard, HL, col. 1237 (14 December 2004)
Judge, I., ‘The Judicial Studies Board Lecture 2010’, Inner Temple (March 2010).
Langbroek, P.M. (ed.), ‘Quality Management in Courts and in the Judicial Organisations in 8 Council of Europe Member States’, CEPEJ (2010/3), CEPEJ Studies no. 13, p. 33
Contini, F. and Mohr, R., Judicial Evaluation: Traditions, Innovations and Proposals for Measuring the Quality of Court Performance (Saarbruken: VDM Verlag, 2008), pp. 36–42.Google Scholar
G.Y. Ng, Quality of Judicial Organisation and Checks and Balances (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2007), p. 133.Google Scholar
Glanfield, L. and Wright, T., Model Key Performance Indicators for NSW Courts (Sydney: Justice Research Centre, Law Foundation of NSW, 2000)Google Scholar
Woolf, , Access to Justice: Final Report to the Lord Chancellor on the Civil Justice System in England and Wales (London: HMSO, 1996).Google Scholar
Bingham, , ‘Judicial Independence’, Judicial Studies Board Annual Lecture (5 November 1996), pp. 67–8.
Fix-Fierro, H., Courts, Justice and Efficiency: A Socio-Legal Study of Economic Rationality in Adjudication (Oxford: Hart, 2004)Google Scholar
Fabri, M., Jean, J.P., Langbroek, P., Pauliat, H., L’Administration de la Justice en Europe et l’Evaluation de sa Qualité (Paris: Montchrestien, 2005).Google Scholar
Beatson, J., ‘Reforming an Unwritten Constitution’ (2010) 126 LQR 48.
Megarry, R.E., Miscellany-at-Law. A Diversion for Lawyers and Others (London: Stevens and Son, 1956), p. 10 (transfer of Sir Ford North from the Queen’s Bench Division to the Chancery Division)Google Scholar
Thomas, LJ, ‘The Judicial and Executive Branches of Government: a New Partnership?’ (2006) 63 Amicus Curiae3.Google Scholar
Sorabji, J., ‘The Road to New Street Station: Fact, Fiction and the Overriding Objective’ (2012) European Business Law Review 23, p. 77.Google Scholar
Fabri, M. and Langbroek, P.M., Is There a Right Judge for Each Case? A Comparative Study of Case Assignment in Six European Countries (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2007).Google Scholar
Susskind, R., ‘Management and Judges’, in Saville, M. and Susskind, R. (eds.), Essays in Honour of Sir Brian Neill: The Quintessential Judge (London: LexisNexis UK, 2003), p. 53.Google Scholar
Clarke, A., ‘The Woolf Reforms: A Singular Event or an Ongoing Process?’, in Dwyer, D. (ed.), The Civil Procedure Rules Ten Years On (Oxford University Press, 2009), 33.Google Scholar
Coulon, J.M., Réflexions et Propositions sur la Procédure Civile, Rapport au Garde des Sceaux (Paris: La Documentation Française, 1997)Google Scholar
Kronman, A.T., The Lost Lawyer, Failing Ideals of the Legal Profession (Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of HUP, 1993)Google Scholar
Fiss, O., ‘The Bureaucratization of the Judiciary’ (1983) 92 YLJ 1442
Genn, H., Judging Civil Justice (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 172–3Google Scholar
Genn, H. et al., ‘Twisting Arms: Court-Referred and Court-Linked Mediation under Judicial Pressure’, Ministry of Justice Research Series 1/07 (May 2007)
Neuberger, MR, ‘Swindlers (including the Master of the Rolls?) Not Wanted: Bentham and Justice Reform’, Bentham Lecture (2 March 2011), paras. 41, 43–4
Jackson, LJ, ‘Review of Civil Litigation Costs: Final Report’ (Belfast: TSO, 2009)
Brooke, H., ‘Courts Modernisation and the Crisis Facing our Civil Courts’, 7th ILAS Annual Lecture (24 November 2004)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×