header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
26 July 2018 / Dr Graham Zellick CBE KC FAcSS
Issue: 7803 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

How ‘Honourable’ are High Court judges?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7803_zellick

Professor Graham Zellick QC unravels the mysteries of parallel, non-optional & post-retirement titles

  • May High Court judges attach the prefix ‘The Honourable’ to their non-judicial title?
  • May retired High Court judges use the prefix ‘The Honourable’?
  • Should any of the current rules be changed?

Puisne judges of the High Court—all justices of the High Court other than the heads of division—have the official title or style of ‘The Honourable Mr/Mrs/Ms Justice Smith’, with forename included only if there is already a judge with that or a similar surname so as to avoid confusion. Although no one seems to know the origin of or authority for this style of address, it is long-established, universally recognised and not disputed.

Also, High Court judges are knighted on appointment or, if a woman, appointed Dame Commander of the Order of the British Empire (DBE). Men are made Knights Bachelor, but as there is no direct female equivalent, women become DBEs. (The male equivalent of DBE is KBE (Knight Commander),

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll