header-logo header-logo

22 July 2022
Issue: 7988 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Diversity
printer mail-detail

Diversity matters: slow progress among judges

White former barristers occupy 95% of senior court judiciary roles (High Court and above), while progress has stalled for ethnic minority candidates and solicitors, the Judicial Diversity Forum has revealed in its statistics report for 2022

The report, Diversity of the judiciary: 2022 statistics, released last week, showed an increase in women, who now account for one third of court judges and half of tribunal judges. However, it also revealed troubling disparities in terms of ethnicity and professional background.

‘Solicitors now make up 45% of applications which demonstrates our members’ interest in judicial careers,’ I Stephanie Boyce, president of the Law Society, said.

‘However, solicitors only make up 27% of recommendations for appointment. Similarly, Black, Asian and minority ethnic candidates represent 23% of applicants, but only 11% of recommendations for judicial posts.

‘There has also been a reduction in the proportion of judges from a solicitor background and no change in the proportion of black judges, which remained at 1% since 2014.’

Mark Fenhalls QC, chair of the Bar Council, said: ‘Until we understand why this is happening―whether there is a problem in the appointment process or whether the issue is experience of applicants, or both―we are going to struggle to address this significant problem.

‘The quality of data is improving, and this provides a welcome opportunity for more effective and targeted interventions by the professions, the JAC [Judicial Appointments Commission], and the judiciary. At the Bar, we are encouraging targets on diversity, through chambers-led diversity programmes and a series of projects to help nurture a more diverse pipeline of successful applicants.’

CILEX Chair Professor Chris Bones said: ‘Opening up all judicial posts to CILEX members would be part of the solution and we look forward to supporting other positive steps to encourage and develop the broadest range of applicants successfully joining the judiciary.’ View the report here.
Issue: 7988 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Diversity
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Firm expands in London and Leeds with dual merger

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Private wealth and real estate firmpromotes two to partner and five to senior associate

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Agile firm expands employment team with two partner hires

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll